Re: Picture me how I 'WALK' & I give you $1.000.000

From: Bill Hobba (bhobba_at_rubbish.net.au)
Date: 10/23/04 

Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:03:21 GMT

"Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato" <valls@icmf.inf.cu> wrote in message
news:33d06fe2.0410221207.6828e083@posting.google.com...
> "Bill Hobba" <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> wrote in message
news:<K%Add.33717$5O5.498@news-server.bigpond.net.au>...
> > "Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato" <valls@icmf.inf.cu> wrote in message
> > news:33d06fe2.0410200229.34c9d7d3@posting.google.com...
> > > "Boyan" <boyan@atitud.cam> wrote in message
> > news:<sjjdd.4549$F6.1259696@news.siol.net>...
> > > > Picture me how I 'WALK' & I shall give you $1.000.000 :-)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > OK, was kidding a bit. But I do wonder if someone here can portray
me
> > > > a picture of how we move through space... By my own limited
imagination
> > > > and using Google.com I came up with this. Clarifying this is
> > appreciated.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Imagine this example:
> > > >
> > > > 1) I am walking through train carriages at 3 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 2) I am traveling with train at speed of 100 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 3) I am rotating, with train, around Earth at 1,670 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 4) I am orbiting, with Earth, around Sun at 107,000 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 5) I am moving, with Solar System, with respect to the
> > > > nearby stars at 72,000 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 6) I am spinning, with Solar System, in spiral around
> > > > Milky Way centre at 828,000 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 7) I am moving, with our Galaxy Milky Way, toward
> > > > the center of the Local Group at 144,000 km/h.
> > > >
> > > > 8) I am moving, with Local Group of galaxies (Local Supercluster),
> > > > at about 2,200,000 km/h relative to the universe as a whole.
> > > >
> > > > 9) I am moving, with everything, through space while Universe
expands at
> > ???
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Is 9th point even to consider -- do we move because of Universe
> > expansion?
> > > > Are presented velocities correct? Are there other motions in space?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This is how we move through space and we don't even consider it,
right?
> > > > (Not that it is practical for our life, but it is interesting to
> > picture...)
> > > >
> > > > So, in more of "fun spirit" I'd ask this:
> > > > By above example (or something similar but "fixed") if you walk
> > > > for 10 meters, how many kilometers you travel in space-time?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > While here I'd like to point you to this article and ask you for
> > opinion:
> > > > Because Universe is expanding faster than the speed of light the
> > Universe
> > > > is 156 billion light-years wide even though it is 13.7 billions
years
> > old:
> > > > http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_040524.html
> > >
> > > Very interesting post. You give me a chance to talk about what I
> > > denote by Hierarchical Inertial System (HIS). All movement is relative
> > > to some inertial system, but all inertial systems are NOT equivalent,
> > > they are in a hierarchical relationship.
> >
> > A note to the original poster. This guy is speaking ****. The POR
> > guarantees the equivalence of all inertial systems.
> >
> > Rest of rubbish mercifully snipped.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Bill
> If your note is for the original poster, why do you sent it to me?
> Can you support the idea that the Earth-Moon center of mass system is
> equivalent to the center of mass Solar one? Can you describe the Solar
> System center of mass movement taking as rest the center of mass of
> the Earth-Moon system? (as you describe the Earth-Moon center of mass
> taking as rest the center of mass of the Solar System). Are you
> vindicating Ptolomeo? I vindicate Galileo!

By the principle of equivalence a freely falling frame placed between
galaxies and screened from outside influences such as EM is about as
inertial as you can get.. Please demonstrate to me how you will tell the
difference between such a frame and one traveling at constant velocity
relative to it? Note I said - screened from outside influences - you can
not peek outside to see how fast you are moving relative to the fixed stars
(or galexies in this case).

> I will suppose that you are not thinking that I have no knowledge
> about the POR, that refers to inertial systems without any mention at
> all about the existence or not of massive bodies, how many or where
> they are located. I have a lot to say about this apparently simple
> detail.

Having engaged you in the past I know you do - it is all rubbish. To prove
me wrong describe to me the experiment that can distinguish one inertial
frame from another (in the sense of a frame as described above) without
arbitrarily deciding on what frame is special in the first place eg by
marking it with red paint or imagining it to contain the CMBR or some such
rot. When you can do that then you will have a basis for your claims.

Bill

> (Just to start a talking that will be more serious that you can
> think).
> Being optimist, I will take for granted that you will accept.
> My first question: do you think that gravitation (or any other kind of
> field) was excluded from Relativity (not yet named "special") in 1905?
>
> RVHG

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Picture me how I WALK & I give you $1.000.000
    ... > guarantees the equivalence of all inertial systems. ... Can you support the idea that the Earth-Moon center of mass system is ... Can you describe the Solar ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... >> SNIP ... >>> In order to account, also, for the equivalence of all inertial systems ... >>> Well then you are not treating the PoR as mere covariance, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)