"compiz" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 1:54 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:32 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:05 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 3:38 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
Just as in the so-called twins paradox .. both twins watches are
correct
for
the relevant twin. One twin really is older than the other.
what is tha difference between
really older and just older?
None, of course, I was just emphasising that it is a *real*
difference
..
not just some sort of optical illusion, or an error in the ticking
of
a
clock.
thanks, so if clock is good, he becomes
really older for no reason
And how did you conclude that nonsense from what I said? No wonder
you
have
problems with physics .. you can't even comprehend written language,
let
alone the mathematics and logic involved.
you said clock no error, but he really gets older
Yes .. he really gets older (the twin that stays at home compared to the
twin the travels).
You really are incredibly slow understanding things
my bad, sorry for thar

If you really are, then that's fine, I am perfectly willing to let bygones
be bygones. Just cut the attitude and hostility.

In the so-called twins paradox, the travelling twin has experienced
less
elapsed time because its path through space-time (which involves
changes
how would you know about others experiences
When they reunit they can have a nice little chat over some coffee ..
that
but when thay reunit is too late, becus their internal
clocks clocks synchronously

From the moment of reuniting on .. yes .. but the difference in elapsed time
happens during the journey .. the travelling twin is younger than the at
home twin.

and therfore you cant put your finger on his clock
and say "look, his clock si clocking slower than
tha other clock" you put yuor other finger on

You can do that during the trip, however. Look up the doppler analysis of
the twins paradox

is assuming the stay-at-home twin is still alive .. the travlling twin
may
end up having to talk to the stay-at-home-twins great great grandchildren
instead.
why that when their clocks are equal?

Really .. you need to keep up here. There clocks would not be equal. They
would show different times (maybe even different days, or years, or
centuries .. depending on the velocities and dinstances invovled). Of
course, after reuniting, the clocks would bovsiouls be ticking at the same
rate (as any observer would agree)

in
frame of reference) is different to that of the stay-at-home twin.
One
can
say that more simply: the stay at home twin is older than the
travelling
twin.
why, entropy goes faster staying home?
Why are you suddenly discussing entropy.
how not doing that?
explain

I don't understand your question "how not doing that?"

It is very simple .. less time has elapsed for the travelling twin
compared
to the stay at home twin,
becus slower clock?

That is what the stay-at-home-twin would see .. yes. Its all relative, of
course.

you cant prove that his clock is
clocking slower than another standard clock

They are both standard clocks .. they both tick at the correct rate for
their frame of refernece .. they are simply taking different routes through
spacetime .. like (as I've mentioned several times) different odometer
readings on cars when they take different routes. Time is a bit
counter-intuitive though, compared to odometres. With cars, the one taking
the straight line has the lowest odomoert reading .. but with time, the one
with the straight line (in this case the stay-at-home-twin) has the longest
time. Time as a fourth dimenions is not exactly like the three spatial
dimensions .. it behaves differently.

elapsing time makes no sense without a standard clock

Well .. it does make sense .. you jsut need a standard clock to measure it
with (ie to be able to put a quantitative figure on it). We can assume that
both twins carry with them a standard clock. When they reunite, their
standard clocks will show a different time.

because the travelling twin has taken a different
path through space-time
different from what path?

The answer is on the line where you interjected your question .. ie

than the stay-at-home twin (from the event where
it says itself, he dident took any path becus
he stayed at home

That is still a path through space-time. That the path (relative to him) is
all a difference in time, and not is space, does not make it any less a
path.

they separate, to the event where they reunite).
they both had the same event?

Yes .. one generally takes it as being a single event (ie assuming that they
were together at the one location). Of course, if this were real twin,s
there ther ewould be at least a few centimeters between them .. but that
doesn't really make any difference in this thought experiment

you can not do that according to fluid dynamics

Fluid dynamics has nothing to do with it.

"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:36:35 +1100, "Jeckyl" wrote:

"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:12:48 +1100, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"Dr. Henri Wilson" HW@.... wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:22:50 GMT, "Ockham"
wrote:
Correct.


| (though both have been observed).

That is actually funny since you cannot say by whom, when
and under what circumstances.




Idiot, did you notice I wrote 'wavelength' and not wavelength.

Yes .. in both cases .. first you said it had a 'wavelength' and then that
is did not have a 'wavelength'. Which is it?

...which implies that this is not a true wavelength but a commonly
defined
one.

Any sort of wavelength is a defined wavelength

I think that's where your confusion lies.
I think you are showing your own confusion
And now then .. how does light move then .. is it like a moving
oscillator,
where the frequency is fixed and the wavelength varies between
observers,
or
like a moving wave, where the wavelength is fixed and the frequency
varies
between observers.
....this is how light moves around a ring gyro.
http://www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/rayphases.exe (now upgraded)

You might be able to deduce a few facts about light from this.

Your animation shows two completely different frequencies of light
(whether
you look at it from the inertial or the rotating frame)

Poor boy....can't click 'pause' and count the wavelengths in the source
frame.....

I said FREQUENCY .. gees you're dumb . .Your animation does NOT show waves
with the same frequency .. it is irrelevant

.. but that is not
the case in a real ring gyro. As per usualy, you do your analysis and
animation on something that is NOT what you claim it to be. That makes
you
a liar.
And you've still not said how light moves .. is it like a moving
oscilator,
or like a wave?
both

It can't be both .. they behave differently .. light must behave like one,
or the other, or neither.

On Feb 1, 1:34 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"compiz" wrote in message

...



On Jan 31, 1:54 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:32 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:05 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 3:38 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
Just as in the so-called twins paradox .. both twins watches are
correct
for
the relevant twin. One twin really is older than the other.
what is tha difference between
really older and just older?
None, of course, I was just emphasising that it is a *real*
difference
..
not just some sort of optical illusion, or an error in the ticking
of
a
clock.
thanks, so if clock is good, he becomes
really older for no reason
And how did you conclude that nonsense from what I said? No wonder
you
have
problems with physics .. you can't even comprehend written language,
let
alone the mathematics and logic involved.
you said clock no error, but he really gets older
Yes .. he really gets older (the twin that stays at home compared to the
twin the travels).
You really are incredibly slow understanding things
my bad, sorry for thar

If you really are, then that's fine, I am perfectly willing to let bygones
be bygones. Just cut the attitude and hostility.

In the so-called twins paradox, the travelling twin has experienced
less
elapsed time because its path through space-time (which involves
changes
how would you know about others experiences
When they reunit they can have a nice little chat over some coffee ..
that
but when thay reunit is too late, becus their internal
clocks clocks synchronously

From the moment of reuniting on .. yes .. but the difference in elapsed time
happens during the journey ..

but there is no differnce you said

if it is, then where?
where went tha diffenrece?

the travelling twin is younger than the at
home twin.

this statement is kind of weird

with no palpable time diffenrece there is
no such a younger nor older

you need a time difference in order to make
one older than another


and therfore you cant put your finger on his clock
and say "look, his clock si clocking slower than
tha other clock" you put yuor other finger on

You can do that during the trip, however. Look up the doppler analysis of
the twins paradox

doppler is false interpretation, you never measure
dopplers, you only do biased interpretations on
false intuitions


is assuming the stay-at-home twin is still alive .. the travlling twin
may
end up having to talk to the stay-at-home-twins great great grandchildren
instead.
why that when their clocks are equal?

Really .. you need to keep up here. There clocks would not be equal.

they ticks equal, how not?

They
would show different times (maybe even different days, or years, or

you just keep saying that, but i am not convinced
without a reason

you need a cause in order to have a reason

centuries .. depending on the velocities and dinstances invovled). Of
course, after reuniting, the clocks would bovsiouls be ticking at the same
rate (as any observer would agree)

therefore seems kinda imposible for anybody
outside to draw any conclusion about what
happened faraway inside


in
frame of reference) is different to that of the stay-at-home twin.
One
can
say that more simply: the stay at home twin is older than the
travelling
twin.
why, entropy goes faster staying home?
Why are you suddenly discussing entropy.
how not doing that?
explain

I don't understand your question "how not doing that?"

how not discussing entropy around that

what is entropy all about?


It is very simple .. less time has elapsed for the travelling twin
compared
to the stay at home twin,
becus slower clock?

That is what the stay-at-home-twin would see .. yes. Its all relative, of
course.

how he woul see anything when his twin travel close
to speed of light

what means of information transportation faster then
light do you refer at?


you cant prove that his clock is
clocking slower than another standard clock

They are both standard clocks .. they both tick at the correct rate for
their frame of refernece .. they are simply taking different routes through
spacetime .. like (as I've mentioned several times) different odometer

what is that spacetime yuo always are talking
about

3D + time to denote motion, yes this is what you
use to depict something

readings on cars when they take different routes. Time is a bit

odometers shows work from tha energy consuption,
entropy not violated

we are talking about missing time here, hereby entropy
violation

counter-intuitive though, compared to odometres. With cars, the one taking
the straight line has the lowest odomoert reading .. but with time, the one
with the straight line (in this case the stay-at-home-twin) has the longest
time. Time as a fourth dimenions is not exactly like the three spatial
dimensions .. it behaves differently.

i can see only orange and apples,

i dont understand


elapsing time makes no sense without a standard clock

Well .. it does make sense .. you jsut need a standard clock to measure it
with (ie to be able to put a quantitative figure on it). We can assume that
both twins carry with them a standard clock. When they reunite, their
standard clocks will show a different time.

then they are not standard both, becus if one
do time differently you cant call that standard

is useless as a standard

because the travelling twin has taken a different
path through space-time
different from what path?

The answer is on the line where you interjected your question .. ie

than the stay-at-home twin (from the event where
it says itself, he dident took any path becus
he stayed at home

That is still a path through space-time. That the path (relative to him) is
all a difference in time, and not is space, does not make it any less a
path.

they separate, to the event where they reunite).
they both had the same event?

Yes .. one generally takes it as being a single event (ie assuming that they
were together at the one location). Of course, if this were real twin,s
there ther ewould be at least a few centimeters between them .. but that
doesn't really make any difference in this thought experiment

you can not do that according to fluid dynamics

Fluid dynamics has nothing to do with it.

fluid dynamics is the most stable powerful theory

"compiz" wrote in message
...
On Feb 1, 1:34 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"compiz" wrote in message

...



On Jan 31, 1:54 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:32 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:05 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
"bambuu" wrote in message
...
On Jan 30, 3:38 am, "Jeckyl" wrote:
Just as in the so-called twins paradox .. both twins watches
are
correct
for
the relevant twin. One twin really is older than the other.
what is tha difference between
really older and just older?
None, of course, I was just emphasising that it is a *real*
difference
..
not just some sort of optical illusion, or an error in the
ticking
of
a
clock.
thanks, so if clock is good, he becomes
really older for no reason
And how did you conclude that nonsense from what I said? No wonder
you
have
problems with physics .. you can't even comprehend written
language,
let
alone the mathematics and logic involved.
you said clock no error, but he really gets older
Yes .. he really gets older (the twin that stays at home compared to
the
twin the travels).
You really are incredibly slow understanding things
my bad, sorry for thar

If you really are, then that's fine, I am perfectly willing to let
bygones
be bygones. Just cut the attitude and hostility.

In the so-called twins paradox, the travelling twin has experienced
less
elapsed time because its path through space-time (which involves
changes
how would you know about others experiences
When they reunit they can have a nice little chat over some coffee ..
that
but when thay reunit is too late, becus their internal
clocks clocks synchronously

From the moment of reuniting on .. yes .. but the difference in elapsed
time
happens during the journey ..
but there is no differnce you said

I said no such thing .. Please don't lie about what I said if you wish to be
treated nicely

if it is, then where?

What do you mean 'where'? You look at one clock and the other clock and see
that the time shown is different.

where went tha diffenrece?

It didn't go anywhere .. one twin simply took a path of less elapsed time ..
just like (as an analogy) a car taking a path of shorter distance between
two points)

the travelling twin is younger than the at
home twin.
this statement is kind of weird

Well .. that is why the twins 'paradox' is called a paradox. not because it
is self-contradictory or cannot happen, but because it is contrary to what
one would intuitively expect.

with no palpable time diffenrece

But there *is* a difference .. how many times do I have to tell you that?

there is
no such a younger nor older

Yes .. there is

you need a time difference in order to make
one older than another

And that is why I have consistently said there is a difference. Gees, can't
you understand simple sentences?

and therfore you cant put your finger on his clock
and say "look, his clock si clocking slower than
tha other clock" you put yuor other finger on
You can do that during the trip, however. Look up the doppler analysis
of
the twins paradox
doppler is false interpretation,

No .. it is not

you never measure dopplers

Yes .. you can

you only do biased interpretations on
false intuitions

No. Have you even looked at the Doppler analysis of the twins paradox .. or
the SR analysis, or the GR analysis?

is assuming the stay-at-home twin is still alive .. the travlling twin
may
end up having to talk to the stay-at-home-twins great great
grandchildren
instead.
why that when their clocks are equal?
Really .. you need to keep up here. There clocks would not be equal.
they ticks equal, how not?

Because there is a difference in the amount of elapsed time .. how many
times do I have to tell you that. If one path has less elapsed time than
the other, then obviously a clock ticks fewer times over the journey.

They
would show different times (maybe even different days, or years, or
you just keep saying that, but i am not convinced
without a reason
you need a cause in order to have a reason

Because that is how reality is, and the theories that best model reality
predict that that is what you get. I have explained it to you as a
difference in the space-time path taken by the twins .. I've used a simple
analogy to help you 'visualise' it. The rest is up to you. Go and read up
on relativity and the twins paradox.

centuries .. depending on the velocities and dinstances invovled). Of
course, after reuniting, the clocks would bovsiouls be ticking at the
same
rate (as any observer would agree)

therefore seems kinda imposible for anybody
outside to draw any conclusion about what
happened faraway inside

What inside and outside are you talking about .. you keep making these wild
off-topic comments.

in
frame of reference) is different to that of the stay-at-home twin.
One
can
say that more simply: the stay at home twin is older than the
travelling
twin.
why, entropy goes faster staying home?
Why are you suddenly discussing entropy.
how not doing that?
explain
I don't understand your question "how not doing that?"
how not discussing entropy around that

Again .. I don't know what you are meaning by the words "how not discussing
entropy around that"

what is entropy all about?

That is something outside of the current discussion on the twins paradox and
GPS .. go look it up in wikipedia if you want a decent overview.

It is very simple .. less time has elapsed for the travelling twin
compared
to the stay at home twin,
becus slower clock?
That is what the stay-at-home-twin would see .. yes. Its all relative,
of
course.
how he woul see anything when his twin travel close
to speed of light

DERR .. because at the end of the journey they are reunited

what means of information transportation faster then
light do you refer at?

I do not refer to any such magical motion

you cant prove that his clock is
clocking slower than another standard clock
They are both standard clocks .. they both tick at the correct rate for
their frame of refernece .. they are simply taking different routes
through
spacetime .. like (as I've mentioned several times) different odometer
what is that spacetime yuo always are talking
about

Read up on it .. I am not going to spoon-feed you every bit of information.

3D + time to denote motion, yes this is what you
use to depict something

Sortof .. read up on it.

readings on cars when they take different routes. Time is a bit
odometers shows work from tha energy consuption,

No .. they show distance .. don't you know what an odometer is?

entropy not violated

There is no violation of entropy (not that you can 'violate' entropy, any
more than you could 'violate' energy)

we are talking about missing time here,

No .. we are not

hereby entropy violation

There is no 'hereby' involved

counter-intuitive though, compared to odometres. With cars, the one
taking
the straight line has the lowest odomoert reading .. but with time, the
one
with the straight line (in this case the stay-at-home-twin) has the
longest
time. Time as a fourth dimenions is not exactly like the three spatial
dimensions .. it behaves differently.
i can see only orange and apples,
i dont understand

Then do some study

elapsing time makes no sense without a standard clock
Well .. it does make sense .. you jsut need a standard clock to measure
it
with (ie to be able to put a quantitative figure on it). We can assume
that
both twins carry with them a standard clock. When they reunite, their
standard clocks will show a different time.
then they are not standard both,

Yes .. they are

becus if one
do time differently

They don't "do time" differently.

you cant call that standard
is useless as a standard

Not at all .. both clocks keep perfect time in their frame of reference
(which is all you can expect a clock to do because time is not some absolute
universal things which is the same everywhere)

because the travelling twin has taken a different
path through space-time
different from what path?
The answer is on the line where you interjected your question .. ie
than the stay-at-home twin (from the event where
it says itself, he dident took any path becus
he stayed at home
That is still a path through space-time. That the path (relative to him)
is
all a difference in time, and not is space, does not make it any less a
path.
they separate, to the event where they reunite).
they both had the same event?
Yes .. one generally takes it as being a single event (ie assuming that
they
were together at the one location). Of course, if this were real twin,s
there ther ewould be at least a few centimeters between them .. but that
doesn't really make any difference in this thought experiment
you can not do that according to fluid dynamics
Fluid dynamics has nothing to do with it.
fluid dynamics is the most stable powerful theory

Just because a theory is 'stable' (whatever you mean by that), that does not
make it relevant.

Please .. go an do some reading on Sr, and on space-time, and on the twins
paradox, and (if you like) on entropy and odometers.

When you have done so, come back and discuss the physics from a position of
some knowledge, rather than from ignorance.

On Jan 31, 2:47*am, "Dirk Van de moortel" dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com wrote:
"snapdragon31" wrote in ...

[snip]

Hi Dirk Vdm,

Do you know relativity? *I am not interested in discussing relativity
with someone who does not even know what the length contraction and
time dilation equations are.
The formula of the length contraction can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction
The equation for the time dilation can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation

Yes, I put them in that format.
Look again.You wrote:

* * x' = x * sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) Length contraction
* * t' = t * sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) Time dilation,

Now *carefully* compare with the Wiki-entries.
And read the *meanings* of the variables and the text.

For length contraction it says:
* "Also note that for the observer in relative movement, the length of
* *the object is measured by subtracting the simultaneously measured
* distances of both ends of the object".
"Simultaneously measured" is modeled in *your* equation by t' = 0.
In the wiki it would be Delta(t') = 0

For time dilation you have multiplied here. The wiki divides, so you
have swapped primed with unprimed.
For time dilation it says:
* *"time interval between two colocal events (i.e. happening at the
* * same place)".
"At the same place" is modeled in *your* equation by x' = 0.
In the wiki (but with primed and unprimed swapped) it would
be Delta(x) = 0

Now look at this:
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...lation_and_len....
Where L and L' are written as Delta(x) and Delta(x')
Don't forget that you have swapped primed with unprimed
in the case of time dilation.

Of course you hate equations.
You understand nothing about these equations.
Before you write an equation, you should understand what
the variables mean.
So next time, READ THE WORDS.
Physics is not an exercise in algebra.
As I told you before, *that* is your problem.

Dirk Vdm

Dirk Vdm

In the original posting, it was clearly defined as
x = distance measured by stationary twin S
t = time measured by twin S
x' = distance measured by twin M
t' = time measured by twin M

If you do not understand what distance means please go back and study
the grade school physics.

Both twins started at the same place and time.
x_0 = 0
t_0 = 0
x_0' = 0
t_0' = 0
delta x = x_1 - x_0 = x_1
This delta x or x_1 can be represented by d, L, s or x

Similarly,
delta t = t_1 - t_0 = t_1
This delta t or t_1 is represented the symbol t here.

On Jan 31, 1:50*am, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Jan 30, 10:37 pm, snapdragon31 wrote:

[...]

The simple Lorentz transform makes the explicit assumption that the
frame being transformed to is traveling at constant velocity v.

Now, what do you call a change of velocity from v --- -v ? I call it
acceleration.

The acceleration breaks the symmetry that you are expecting.

You are right. Acceleration breaks the symmetry.

This is the first leg of the journey and no acceleration was
involved. You can ignore the GR. Only SR applies in this case.

"snapdragon31" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 1:50 am, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Jan 30, 10:37 pm, snapdragon31 wrote:

[...]

The simple Lorentz transform makes the explicit assumption that the
frame being transformed to is traveling at constant velocity v.

Now, what do you call a change of velocity from v --- -v ? I call it
acceleration.

The acceleration breaks the symmetry that you are expecting.

You are right. Acceleration breaks the symmetry.

This is the first leg of the journey and no acceleration was
involved. You can ignore the GR. Only SR applies in this case.

With all the snipping and replying I've lost track of what you were trying
to say here.

As I recall you showed that if you do a Lorentz transform from S to M, you
that something at rest in M with a given length has a shorter instantaneous
length when measured in S. And then if you take something at rest in S with
that given length, it will have a shorter instantaneous length when measured
in M. Then, because you happened to use 'x' for the length in both
transformation, you think that the values should be the same.

NOTE: When I say instantaneous length that is to remind you that length of
an object in a given frame of reference K means the distance between its end
points at some given time t (ie at the same instant .. simultaneously) in
frame of reference K.

What you are doing is similar to having (say) two rulers lying on the table
at an angle (of 60deg), with the zero ends of each ruler touching (making a
v) .. draw a line at right angles from ruler A so it meets ruler B at the 6"
mark .. the point on A will should be the 3" mark (that is like a length
contraction). Then you draw a line at right angles from ruler B so it meets
ruler A at the 3" mark .. that will be a point on B of 1.5". Your
conclusion is then like claiming that geometry is wrong because 1.5" is not
equal to 6". Do you see the problem there?

On Jan 31, 12:50 am, Eric Gisse wrote:

The acceleration breaks the symmetry that you are expecting.

No, the acceleration does not break the Lorentz symmetry also better
known as the principle of relativity discovered by Galileo 400 years
ago.

If you have claimed so, care to prove it. Just because you say so
does not make it so. shrug

"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:50 am, Eric Gisse wrote:

The acceleration breaks the symmetry that you are expecting.

No, the acceleration does not break the Lorentz symmetry also better
known as the principle of relativity discovered by Galileo 400 years
ago.

If you have claimed so, care to prove it. Just because you say so
does not make it so. shrug

Experimental evidence proves it

"Jeckyl" wrote in message
...
"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
...
On Jan 31, 12:50 am, Eric Gisse wrote:

The acceleration breaks the symmetry that you are expecting.

No, the acceleration does not break the Lorentz symmetry also better
known as the principle of relativity discovered by Galileo 400 years
ago.

If you have claimed so, care to prove it. Just because you say so
does not make it so. shrug

Experimental evidence proves it

Perhaps better said as Experimental evidence supports it, and theory
predicts it, and the theory is in agreement with the experimental results.
That's as close as you get to a 'proof' in physics