"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message
...
| In sci.physics.relativity, Androcles
|
| wrote
| on Sat, 02 Feb 2008 15:40:44 GMT
| :
|
| "The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message
| news | | In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl
| |
| | wrote
| | on Sat, 2 Feb 2008 17:41:55 +1100
| | :
| | "snapdragon31" wrote in message
| |
|
...
| | The measurement is always on the distance between the Earth and the
| | star 10c away.
| |
| | Relative to whom?
| |
| | Presumably, S.
| |
| |
| | Twin S can predict what twin M measures based on S's information.
| | But twin M cannot predict what twin S measures based on M's
| | information.
| |
| | Yes .. they can .. its exactly the same math .. the problem is only
that
| | *you* can't
| |
| | Predict? With a sufficiently large radiotelescope one can
| | easily observe (in theory) the other twin, and the slowdown
| | and speedup are symmetric in frequency but not in duration.
| |
| | Briefly put, M sees S slowed down for half of his trip,
| | and sped up for the other half.
| |
| | Elapsed time (M) Observed ticks (S)
| | L/(vg) sqrt(1-v/c)/sqrt(1+v/c)*L/(vg)
| | L/(vg) sqrt(1+v/c)/sqrt(1-v/c)*L/(vg)
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | 2L/(vg) ((1-v/c)+(1+v/c))*L/(vg*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
| | = 2L/v
| |
| | For his part S sees
| |
| | Elapsed time (S) Observed ticks (M)
| | sqrt(1+v/c)/sqrt(1-v/c)*L/(vg) L/(vg)
| | sqrt(1-v/c)/sqrt(1+v/c)*L/(vg) L/(vg)
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | 2L/v 2L/(vg)
| |
| | as one might expect. The problem is perfectly symmetrical in many
| | respects, except that M has to turn around at the midway point.
|
| Interesting.
| So M gets fewer (emailed by radio) birthday cards than S, or do they
| (being siblings) both send and receive the same number?
|
| Now all I need to know is what a distance of 10c is...
|
| It's 10 times less than the distance of a dollar, of course. :-)
|
Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
get a different number of cards because they are different ages.

"Androcles" wrote in message
. uk...

"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message
news | In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl
|
| wrote
| on Sat, 2 Feb 2008 17:41:55 +1100
| :
| "snapdragon31" wrote in message
|
...
| The measurement is always on the distance between the Earth and the
| star 10c away.
|
| Relative to whom?
|
| Presumably, S.
|
|
| Twin S can predict what twin M measures based on S's information.
| But twin M cannot predict what twin S measures based on M's
| information.
|
| Yes .. they can .. its exactly the same math .. the problem is only
that
| *you* can't
|
| Predict? With a sufficiently large radiotelescope one can
| easily observe (in theory) the other twin, and the slowdown
| and speedup are symmetric in frequency but not in duration.
|
| Briefly put, M sees S slowed down for half of his trip,
| and sped up for the other half.
|
| Elapsed time (M) Observed ticks (S)
| L/(vg) sqrt(1-v/c)/sqrt(1+v/c)*L/(vg)
| L/(vg) sqrt(1+v/c)/sqrt(1-v/c)*L/(vg)
| --------------------------------------------------------
| 2L/(vg) ((1-v/c)+(1+v/c))*L/(vg*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
| = 2L/v
|
| For his part S sees
|
| Elapsed time (S) Observed ticks (M)
| sqrt(1+v/c)/sqrt(1-v/c)*L/(vg) L/(vg)
| sqrt(1-v/c)/sqrt(1+v/c)*L/(vg) L/(vg)
| --------------------------------------------------------
| 2L/v 2L/(vg)
|
| as one might expect. The problem is perfectly symmetrical in many
| respects, except that M has to turn around at the midway point.

Interesting.
So M gets fewer (emailed by radio) birthday cards than S, or do they
(being siblings) both send and receive the same number?

vice versa, actually, if we are talking about a full two-way twins-paradox
situation. M will end up getting way too many from S, and S will get very
few from M. The rate of arrival of cards will be quite different for the
two legs of the twins-paradox trip. Have a look at a Doppler analysis of
the twins paradox.

Now all I need to know is what a distance of 10c is...

Indeed .. but we being generous and are assuming that it is the distance
light would travel in 10 units of time (the units of time being implicit
there).

"Androcles" wrote in message
k...
Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
get a different number of cards because they are different ages.

Who is N ? And why do you think there would be any cards missing?

In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl

wrote
on Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:05:35 +1100
:
"Androcles" wrote in message
k...
Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
get a different number of cards because they are different ages.

Who is N ? And why do you think there would be any cards missing?


Androcles' equivalent of "tick fairies", apparently. As for
missing...Relativity adds up but the Twin Paradox does look
a little strange for those who think time should be the same
regardless of whether one's on the ground, a train, a plane,
a boat, a starship, or a satellite.

It is possible for S to include "Happy Birthday
M!" greetings in his datastream to M though. Of course
because of the time slowdown, assuming both were born on
January 1 for simplicity, S will have to send them on
various days of the year (his calendar).

--
#191,
Conventional memory has to be one of the most UNconventional
architectures I've seen in a computer system.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in message
...
| In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl
|
| wrote
| on Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:05:35 +1100
| :
| "Androcles" wrote in message
| k...
| Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
| birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
| get a different number of cards because they are different ages.
|
| Who is N ? And why do you think there would be any cards missing?
|
|
| Androcles' equivalent of "tick fairies", apparently. As for
| missing...Relativity adds up

Go on then, do it, you like playing the numbers game.


| but the Twin Paradox does look
| a little strange for those who think time should be the same
| regardless of whether one's on the ground, a train, a plane,
| a boat, a starship, or a satellite.
|
| It is possible for S to include "Happy Birthday
| M!" greetings in his datastream to M though. Of course
| because of the time slowdown, assuming both were born on
| January 1 for simplicity, S will have to send them on
| various days of the year (his calendar).

Handwaving because you know I'm right. Try handshaking
instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handshaking

You won't though, you'll carry on showing the world
you are as ignorant and stooopid as Fecal Jeckyl.

The Ghost In The Machine skrev:
In sci.physics.relativity, Randy Poe

wrote
Yes, both wavelength and frequency experience a doppler shift.

Only in SR (though both have been observed). In Newtonian
math the frequency changes as per the Doppler, but the
wavelength is unaltered.

This isn't quite correct, it depend on which theory
you use for light together with Newtonian mechanics
(with Galilean relativity).
A "Michelson type" ether theory predicts the same
as SR (to a first order approximation) for a Sagnac ring.
When the source is _moving_ in the ether, the wavelength is
altered by the factor (c-v)/c. That's why the numbers
of wavelengths in the two beams are different, and dependent
on the rotation speed.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

Dr. Henri Wilson skrev:
The wavelength of any TRAVELING wave is absolute and frame independent.

The 'wavelength' of an OSCILLATOR (such as a spinning wheel), if defined as
'the distance it travels in one of its cycles', IS of course frame dependent.

Oscillators don't actually possess 'wavelengths'.
I think that's where your confusion lies.

Quite.
Oscillators don't have wavelengths, and this wavelength is defined as
'the distance it travels in one of its cycles'.

And these oscillators without a wavelength which IS of course frame dependent,
can explain why the invariant wavelength of TRAVELLING waves can be frame
dependent after all, so that the number of wavelengths in the two rays
can be different, and BaTh can predict that Sagnac can detect rotation.

Confusion?
Where?
Isn't this crystal clear?

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:38:44 -0800, The Ghost In The Machine
wrote:

In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl

wrote
on Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:05:35 +1100
:
"Androcles" wrote in message
k...
Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
get a different number of cards because they are different ages.

Who is N ? And why do you think there would be any cards missing?


Androcles' equivalent of "tick fairies", apparently. As for
missing...Relativity adds up but the Twin Paradox does look
a little strange for those who think time should be the same
regardless of whether one's on the ground, a train, a plane,
a boat, a starship, or a satellite.

Time 'instant' is universal. Tiime 'flow' is universal. Time 'interval' is
universal.
'Now' here is NOW everywhere.

It is possible for S to include "Happy Birthday
M!" greetings in his datastream to M though. Of course
because of the time slowdown, assuming both were born on
January 1 for simplicity, S will have to send them on
various days of the year (his calendar).

--
#191,
Conventional memory has to be one of the most UNconventional
architectures I've seen in a computer system.



Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)

www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 20:28:06 +0100, "Paul B. Andersen"
wrote:

The Ghost In The Machine skrev:
In sci.physics.relativity, Randy Poe

wrote
Yes, both wavelength and frequency experience a doppler shift.

Only in SR (though both have been observed). In Newtonian
math the frequency changes as per the Doppler, but the
wavelength is unaltered.

This isn't quite correct, it depend on which theory
you use for light together with Newtonian mechanics
(with Galilean relativity).
A "Michelson type" ether theory predicts the same
as SR (to a first order approximation) for a Sagnac ring.
When the source is _moving_ in the ether, the wavelength is
altered by the factor (c-v)/c. That's why the numbers
of wavelengths in the two beams are different, and dependent
on the rotation speed.

"IF SR was correct and IF there was an aether and IF the MMX contracted and IF
the source was moving and IF Andersen had some kind of brain instead of a lump
of ice......


Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)

www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

"Androcles" wrote in message
. uk...

"The Ghost In The Machine" wrote in
message
...
| In sci.physics.relativity, Jeckyl
|
| wrote
| on Sun, 3 Feb 2008 10:05:35 +1100
| :
| "Androcles" wrote in message
| k...
| Sure... but I still want to know what happened to the missing emailed
| birthdays cards. M sent N cards, S sent N cards but M and S
| get a different number of cards because they are different ages.
|
| Who is N ? And why do you think there would be any cards missing?
|
|
| Androcles' equivalent of "tick fairies", apparently. As for
| missing...Relativity adds up

Go on then, do it, you like playing the numbers game.


| but the Twin Paradox does look
| a little strange for those who think time should be the same
| regardless of whether one's on the ground, a train, a plane,
| a boat, a starship, or a satellite.
|
| It is possible for S to include "Happy Birthday
| M!" greetings in his datastream to M though. Of course
| because of the time slowdown, assuming both were born on
| January 1 for simplicity, S will have to send them on
| various days of the year (his calendar).

Handwaving because you know I'm right. Try handshaking
instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handshaking

You won't though, you'll carry on showing the world
you are as ignorant and stooopid as Fecal Jeckyl.

Look upDoppler analysis of the twins paradox .. it is about hand-shaking ..
with twins sending signals to each other at regular intervals (birthday
cards, if you like) .. it answers all your questions from ignorance.

Not that you will .. you don't WANT to understand, because then you'll have
nothing more to complain about .. Just like your continued complaining about
time for light A-B being the same as time for light B-A when A and B are
at rest .. the most basic of concepts that you refuse to grasp because it
contradicts your strawman attacks