"What Broke the Symmetry?"

All of the below is based solely on Einstein's
"Train/Embankment" Gedanken:
(see http://www.bartleby.com/173/9.html)

Given:
Two events E(1) and E(2) occur as inertial
observers A and B meet between the events.

E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.

However, as Einstein stated, the observers will see
the light rays arrive _differently_, so the initial
symmetry becomes broken.

This brings us to today's critical query, namely,
**********What breaks the symmetry?**********

We can answer this important question by using the
simple process of elimination, as follows:

There are only three things involved here, viz.,
(i) events, (ii) light rays, and (iii) observers.
it goes without saying that the events did not
break the symmetry, so this leaves only light rays
and the observers; since the light rays merely mimic
the events, we see that they are also innocent; this
leaves only the observers.

But what is it about the observers that broke the
symmetry?

As Einstein said, they moved __differently__ with
respect to the light rays.

Paraphrasing Einstein:
"Although the embankment observer sees the light beams
arrive simultaneously, the train observer is hastening
towards one beam of light, whilst he is riding on ahead
of the other beam of light, so he does not see the
beams arrive simultaneously; specifically, he will see
the beam toward which he is moving __before__ he sees
the beam from which he is moving."

AN IMPORTANT CONCLUSION:
Clearly, Einstein's Gedanken proves that inertial
observers in different frames move __differently__
with respect to any given light ray.

AN IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
If inertial observers A and B move __differently__
relative to a light ray, then the ray must in turn
move __differently__ relative to the observers;
this means that light's speed relative to the
observers __differs__.

ANOTHER IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Clock pairs in various inertial frames cannot be
started simultaneously by light rays which are
emitted by a midway source, so the clocks of
special relativity cannot be synchronous
(except for those in the few frames which
remain symmetrical about the source).

YET ANOTHER IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Given relativity's asynchronous clocks, light's
speed cannot be accurately determined.

THE FINAL IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Given synchronous clocks, light's speed __can__
be accurately determined, and, as we know, it
will then vary with frame velocity.

|DE|

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

"Dark Energy" wrote in message ...
"What Broke the Symmetry?"

All of the below is based solely on Einstein's
"Train/Embankment" Gedanken:
(see http://www.bartleby.com/173/9.html)

Given:
Two events E(1) and E(2) occur as inertial
observers A and B meet between the events.

E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.

If, according to A, the events are simultaneous and equidistant,
then, according to B, they are not simultaneous and not equidistant,
and vice versa.
You can have symmetry between A and B, if the events are
simultaneous and equidistant according to some third observer
C, w.r.t. whom A and B move with the same speed in opposite
directions.

Does this help?

Dirk Vdm

Dark Energy wrote:
"What Broke the Symmetry?"

All of the below is based solely on Einstein's
"Train/Embankment" Gedanken:
(see http://www.bartleby.com/173/9.html)

Given:
Two events E(1) and E(2) occur as inertial
observers A and B meet between the events.

E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.

However, as Einstein stated, the observers will see
the light rays arrive _differently_, so the initial
symmetry becomes broken.

This brings us to today's critical query, namely,
**********What breaks the symmetry?**********

We can answer this important question by using the
simple process of elimination, as follows:

There are only three things involved here, viz.,
(i) events, (ii) light rays, and (iii) observers.
it goes without saying that the events did not
break the symmetry, so this leaves only light rays
and the observers; since the light rays merely mimic
the events, we see that they are also innocent; this
leaves only the observers.


Sorry... there are only three things *considered*.
There are more than three things *involved* and
they are left ambiguous. That make the illustration
invalid as any kind of useful thought experiment.



Propagation in a dielectric medium
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...es/node98.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_impedance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space
http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what.html


Abstract
Einstein addressed the twin paradox in special relativity
in a relatively unknown, unusual and rarely cited paper
written in 1918, in the form of a dialogue between a
critic and a relativist. Contrary to most textbook versions
of the resolution, Einstein admitted that the special
relativistic time dilation was symmetric for the twins,
and he had to invoke, asymmetrically, the general relativistic
gravitational time dilation during the brief periods
of acceleration to justify the asymmetrical aging.
Notably, Einstein did not use any argument related to
simultaneity or Doppler shift in his analysis. I discuss
Einstein's resolution and several conceptual issues
that arise. It is concluded that Einstein's resolution using
gravitational time dilation suffers from logical and
physical flaws, and gives incorrect answers in a general
setting. The counter examples imply the need to reconsider
many issues related to the comparison of transported
clocks. The failure of the accepted views and
resolutions is traced to the fact that the special relativity
principle formulated originally for physics in empty
space is not valid in the matter-filled universe.

C. S. Unnikrishnan
Gravitation Group,
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,
Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400 005, India
http://www.iisc.ernet.in/currsci/dec252005/2009.pdf

"The [ ] Incompatibility of the Law of Propagation of
Light with the Principle of Relativity [is only] Apparent"
http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html

Time-independent Maxwell equations
Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin.../lectures.html

Maxwell's equations in classic electrodynamics
(classic field theory)_
a) Maxwell equations (no movement),
b) Maxwell equations (with moved bodies)
http://www.wolfram-stanek.de/maxwell...assic_extended



But what is it about the observers that broke the
symmetry?

As Einstein said, they moved __differently__ with
respect to the light rays.

Paraphrasing Einstein:
"Although the embankment observer sees the light beams
arrive simultaneously, the train observer is hastening
towards one beam of light, whilst he is riding on ahead
of the other beam of light, so he does not see the
beams arrive simultaneously; specifically, he will see
the beam toward which he is moving __before__ he sees
the beam from which he is moving."

AN IMPORTANT CONCLUSION:
Clearly, Einstein's Gedanken proves that inertial
observers in different frames move __differently__
with respect to any given light ray.

Frayed knot:
A Lorentz transformation or any other coordinate
transformation will convert electric or magnetic
fields into mixtures of electric and magnetic fields,
but no transformation mixes them with the
gravitational field.
http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-58/iss-11/p31.html

Sue...




AN IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
If inertial observers A and B move __differently__
relative to a light ray, then the ray must in turn
move __differently__ relative to the observers;
this means that light's speed relative to the
observers __differs__.

ANOTHER IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Clock pairs in various inertial frames cannot be
started simultaneously by light rays which are
emitted by a midway source, so the clocks of
special relativity cannot be synchronous
(except for those in the few frames which
remain symmetrical about the source).

YET ANOTHER IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Given relativity's asynchronous clocks, light's
speed cannot be accurately determined.

THE FINAL IMPORTANT COROLLARY:
Given synchronous clocks, light's speed __can__
be accurately determined, and, as we know, it
will then vary with frame velocity.

|DE|

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

"Sue..." wrote in message oups.com...
[...]

Hey Dennis! I've never seen an aether, have you?

http://tinyurl.com/yndvwx

http://www.quackwatch.org/01Quackery...cs/pseudo.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pf3z935R37E

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
Does this help?

Yes, it helped to confuse the issue.

You need to read the following from Einstein:

"If an observer sitting in the position M' in the
train did not possess this velocity, then he would
remain permanently at M, and the light rays emitted
by the flashes of lightning A and B would reach him
simultaneously, i.e. they would meet just where he
is situated."

As I said, and as Einstein said, the only reason the
observers saw the light beams arrive differently was
the observers' different velocities wrt to the light
beams.

|DE|

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

"Dark Energy" wrote in message ...
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
Does this help?

Yes, it helped to confuse the issue.

I thought it wouldn't help, but it could have been worth
the try.

Dirk Vdm

Dark Energy wrote:
"What Broke the Symmetry?"

All of the below is based solely on Einstein's
"Train/Embankment" Gedanken:
(see http://www.bartleby.com/173/9.html)

Given:
Two events E(1) and E(2) occur as inertial
observers A and B meet between the events.

E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.


As viewed from which frame?

Paul Cardinale

Paul Cardinale wrote:
Dark Energy wrote:
E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.


As viewed from which frame?

Paul Cardinale

From any frame.

As Einstein said, at the time of the above diagram,
"If an observer sitting in the position M' in the
train did not possess this velocity, then he would
remain permanently at M, and the light rays emitted
by the flashes of lightning A and B would reach him
simultaneously, i.e. they would meet just where he
is situated."

In other words, at the time of the above diagram,
M and M' are interchangeable and equivalent, so
they are symmetrical wrt the events and to the
light rays coming from them.

Perhaps I should not have taken it for granted
that most folk here understood Einstein's famous
Train/Embankment Gedanken.

|DE|

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

"Dark Energy" wrote in message ...
Paul Cardinale wrote:
Dark Energy wrote:
E(1)---------------------------------------------E(2)
---light ray----------------------- light ray---
------------------------A-------------------------
------------------------B-------------------------

As shown, observers A and B are now symmetrical with
respect to the events.


As viewed from which frame?

Paul Cardinale

From any frame.

As Einstein said, at the time of the above diagram,
"If an observer sitting in the position M' in the
train did not possess this velocity, then he would
remain permanently at M, and the light rays emitted
by the flashes of lightning A and B would reach him
simultaneously, i.e. they would meet just where he
is situated."

In other words, at the time of the above diagram,
M and M' are interchangeable and equivalent, so
they are symmetrical wrt the events and to the
light rays coming from them.

Perhaps I should not have taken it for granted
that most folk here understood Einstein's famous
Train/Embankment Gedanken.

Perhaps you should ask questions and find out where
exactly your brain gets stuck, as opposed to making a
fool of yourself by trying to prove that the rest of the
planet is populated with idiots.

Dirk Vdm

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 20:54:48 GMT, "Dirk Van de moortel"
wrote:
Perhaps you should ask questions and find out where
exactly your brain gets stuck, as opposed to making a
fool of yourself by trying to prove that the rest of the
planet is populated with idiots.

Maybe you have something there.
Here's my question:

How do M and M' differ at the start of
Einstein's Train/Embankment Gedanken?

|DE|

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