![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: making, observations, quotthe, relativistic, systemsquot |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
"The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems"
A while ago a program was presented on NOVA in which a physicist described an experiment. In this experiment he used two identical atomic clocks and transported one of them around the world in a jet aircraft. He observed that the transported clock recorded less elapsed time than the identical clock that remained in place. He concluded from this that time slowed down as a result of the aircraft's velocity. He asserted that "as far as he was concerned, time is what clocks measure". It is the purpose of this posting to examine the validity of his belief. Suppose we consider an experiment in which we measure the price of gasoline in two different locations (reference frame #1 and reference frame #2) using the units of measurement existing at those locations and denoted as dollars and gallons in both. In reference frame #1 we observe that gasoline costs $1/gallon and in reference frame #2 we also observe that gasoline costs $1/gallon. We can assert from this that the price of gasoline is "a constant" (1$/gallon) between those locations that, for this example, are only 10 miles apart. Can we rigorously assert that the price of gasoline does not change ("is constant"} between those locations? The answer is that we cannot without further information. Suppose one of the locations was in Windsor, Ontario, Canada and the other location is across the river in Detroit, Michigan, USA? At the Canadian location, the price of gasoline would be measured in terms of Canadian dollars and Imperial Gallons while at the US location; the price of gasoline would be measured in US gallons and US dollars. Since the Imperial Gallon is 25% larger than the US gallon, the price of gasoline, while being "a constant" (invariant) between those locations, would not be "constant" between them except for the case where the Canadian dollar was worth 1.25 US dollars. In this experiment, in order to draw a legitimate conclusion it is necessary to take in consideration the relative sizes of the units of measurement for fluid and money at the two locations (reference frames) even though they have the same names. The same requirement is incumbent on an experimenter who is making measurements between reference frames (elevation or velocity). Before we can draw any conclusion as to what is actually occurring between two reference frames which differ in elevation or velocity, we must first determine how the appropriate units of measurement are affected by the difference in reference frame and correct the readings made locally appropriately. (This is no different than the technique used by land surveyors when they correct their measurements of distance for the effects of ambient temperature on their steel tapes. I would assert that the science of physics should be at least as rigorous as the more mundane field of land surveying.) The information needed to make the corrections for reference frames that differ in velocity were provided in 1903 by Fitzgerald, Larmor, and Lorentz and are collectively known as the Lorentz Transformations. The resultant theory was denoted as the Lorentz Transformation-Aether Theory. Using these transformations, one finds that the effects of velocity are quite reasonable in terms of classical Newtonian Physics, THERE IS NO MYSTERY. In 1905 Dr. Einstein derived Special Relativity using mathematics applied to accepted physical laws. If one examines both theories one finds that they are actually the same theory since one may be derived from the other, with the Aether Relativity Theory being a special case solution of STR in which one of the infinite number of solutions that STR allows between the limits of +/- C represents the Aether but we are prevented from measuring that velocity with respect to it by the Lorentz Transformations and the velocity limit on communications imposed by the velocity of light. When one examines the atomic clock experiment one must decide between one of two interpretations. One must consider the possibility of whether that velocity of the trip caused the moving clock to speed up during one part of its trip around the world and to slow up on the part so that the total elapsed time was consistent with the observation. The other interpretation was that the velocity made the rate of passage of time itself change due to its movement through space-time. In order to distinguish between the possibilities, it is necessary only necessary to consider the effects of a change in reference frame occurring when the observations are made and these observations are made at the same location and at the same velocity reference and, as a result, we must conclude that it was not time which slowed during the trip, it was the speed of the clock. (This conclusion may be made easier to accept when one recognizes that the experiment could have been set up, in principle, in a form akin the auto speed tests on the Bonneville Salt Flats in which the clock travels at a constant rate of speed and in a straight line in one direction and then is stopped and reversed indirection and returns to its starting point along the same straight line. All of the measurements would be made by identical clocks with the time required to turn the vehicle around subtracted from the time difference. Spacetime is not involved in this analysis.) Since all of the measurements of the actual experiment were made at the same location and velocity reference frame, the actual elapsed time must have been the same for both clocks one must conclude that it was the moving clock that slowed its speed and not a reduction of the actual passage of time. The physicists assertion that "time is what clocks measure" is naive. "Time is what clocks measure after the assumed speed of the clock has been corrected for the change in size of the units of measurement for time resulting from velocity". (In other words, changing the velocity of the clock caused its scale factor to change. there are sound and easily understood physical reason as why this occurs.) Larmor was intelligent enough to provide the necessary correction factor (the Lorentz Transformation for Time and Dr. Einstein was considerate enough to derive it rigorously from basic principles. The source material for this posting may be found in http://einsteinhoax/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997}); http://einsteinhoax/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and http://einsteinhoax/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity" {1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS. All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm . Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts, please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary. E-mail:- The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5 years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn. Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one exception for which a correction was provided. |
| Ads |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yabe wrote:
"The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems" Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax" at crank dot net. http://www.google.com/search?q=einst...Awww.crank.net |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yabe wrote:
"The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems" [snip ignorant crap] http://www.freefarts.com/farts.html Move cursor over blinkers to hear Retic's lecture. Psychotic ineducable boring spammer retic (Ernest Wittke), You see yourself this way, http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way, http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png http://www.edu-observatory.org/cranks.html http://www.pagetutor.com/idiot/idiot.html http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf http://www.****inggoogleit.com/ http://www.meninhats.com/d/20040430.html http://www.you-moron.com/ http://groups.google.com/groups?q=gr...uthor%3Awittke http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html http://www.firehead.org/~jessh/film/kubrick/Kubrick-Psycho.html http://www.naturalchild.com/elliott_barker/prisons.html The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987), "The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special Relativity (1999) [snip] Hey, stooopid spammer Ernest Wittke - Do you want EVIDENCE? Each of the 24 GPS satellites carries either four cesium atomic clocks or three rubidum atomic clocks in orbit, with full relativistic corrections being applied. NAVSTAR Block II GPS satellites (currently being launched as replacements) have two rubidium and two cesium atomic clocks. Internal inconsistencies in SR (meaning inconsistencies of a purely mathematical logical nature) automatically lead to contradictions in number theory, itself, and arithmetic, since the mathematics of Minkowski geometry is equiconsistent with the theory of real numbers and with arithmetic. http://optoelectronics.perkinelmer.com/content/Datasheets/rfs2f.pdf http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html Mathematics of gravitation http://wugrav.wustl.edu/people/CMW/update98.pdf http://www.astro.northwestern.edu/AspenW04/Papers/lorimer1.pdf http://www.vallis.org/publications/tesidott.pdf Equivalence Principle testing http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0111236 Geometric structure of reality http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0103044 http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140 GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7 http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/index.html http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039 http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html Experimental constraints on General Relativity http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf Nature 425 374 (2003) http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/index.html Relativity in the GPS system http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014 Amer. J. Phys. 71 770 (2003) Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 121101 (2004) falling light http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012 Hafele-Keating Experiment http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html Twin Paradox Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004) http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086 http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071 http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html http://skyandtelescope.com/news/article_1473_1.asp Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405160 Black hole evaporation Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004) http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml No aether http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/mans/clane/ http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7 No Lorentz violation http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0409089 Spin-2 gravitons have problems http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics.strings/msg/ba31a00f5f26277a (so does the proposal) http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411113 http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 261101 (2004) Nordtvedt Effect http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/ http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403292 http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310723 WMAP + Sloane Digital Sky Survey http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175 Dark matter candidates http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll/frames.html Carroll on what it all means. Special Relativity is physics on a topologically trivial Lorentzian manifold with a metric whose curvature tensor is zero. This is a perfectly diffeomorphism-invariant condition and does not require any particular coordinate choice. It is invariant under the full group of diffeomorphisms. The Poincare group is the group of *isometries* of the metric in special relativity. The Special Relativity metric is *non-dynamical* (unlike GR). It defines the coupling *constants* of your theory. If you change the metric in any nontrivial way you are changing your theory. An operation can only be called a "symmetry" of a special-relativistic (non-gravitational) theory if it preserves the metric, and therefore the symmetry of special-relativistic theories is the Poincare group only. General Relativity (gravitation) has a dynamic metric. NIM A 355 537 (1995) Physics Letters B 328 103 (1994) Physical Review Letters 64 1697 (1990) Physical Review Letters 39 1051 (1977) Physical Review 135 B1071 (1964) Physics Letters 12 260 (1964) Europhysics Letters 56(2) 170-174 (2001) General Relativity and Gravitation 34(9) 1371 (2002) http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/ae_1905_error.htm http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/finkelstein/relativity.pdf Longitudinal and transverse mass Physics Today 58(3) 34 (2005) Time passage, equator vs. poles http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076 http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/ http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1 http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn. Right, like your head has ever been withdrawn from your ass - even when you ****. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| "The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems" | Tahc | Physics - General Discussion | 6 | August 13th 05 03:57 PM |
| The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems (#15) | Clihcwq | Physics - General Discussion | 2 | November 9th 04 05:22 PM |
| The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems | Tsiwtwy | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | April 5th 04 04:00 PM |
| The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems | Retnirpwd | Physics - General Discussion | 3 | January 31st 04 10:33 PM |
| The Making of Observations in Relativistic Systems | Deweiv22 | Physics - General Discussion | 1 | October 23rd 03 02:08 AM |