Re: Relative Movement vs. Moving through Space

From: Franz Heymann (notfranz.heymann_at_btopenworld.com)
Date: 12/18/04 

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 15:21:02 +0000 (UTC)

"Paul Stowe" <ps@acompletelyjunkaddress.net> wrote in message
news:8t14s0tq3sqtkivsqnmotk4ookv4lvso6k@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 21:31:26 +0000 (UTC),
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu
> (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>
> >In article <p6t3s057qeunrni8dc1qh9vb876leovvn5@4ax.com>,
> >Paul Stowe <ps@acompletelyjunkaddress.net> wrote:
> >>On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 20:47:59 +0000 (UTC),
glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu
> >>(Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> >
> >>>> And what part of,
> >>>>
> >>>> "That is ALL that is physically necessary! Anything
> >>>> else is philosophical BS."
> >>>>
> >>>> did you NOT understand???
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul Stowe
> >>>
> >>> The part where you said "physically necessary".
> >>>
> >>> If you just want a survey marker, pick any one you like. But
> >>> it won't have the fundamental importance of my instantaneous
> >>> position.
> >>
> >> Nature knows no 'positions', speeds, or frames. These are human
> >> conceptions. The problem is, now that an absolute FOR for motion
> >> has been found certain mentalities are trying to wiggle, squirm,
> >> and re-define the term to save an meta-physical perspective. In
> >> repect to motion dx/dt is all that matters. Both of these are
> >> compatible with Lorentz covariance AND a universal absolute rest
> >> frame.
> >>
> >> Hell, some have gone so far as to claim if they close their eyes
> >> so the can't see the CMBR, it's can't be fundamental. This is as
> >> asinine as me claiming if I close my eyes light doesn't exist.
> >>
> >> These types remind me of the Bug-Bladder Beast :)
> >>
> >> Paul Stowe
> >
> >
> > If you choose to use the CMBR as a survey marker, that's up to
you.
> > It's a large-scale Greenwich Meridian.
>
> Isn't that ALL a global 'absolute' reference frame is, a
large-scale
> Greenwich Meridian... :)

No. Maxwell's equations have the same form in all the inertial frames
of which I know. If there is anything special about this absolute
frame of which you speak, how will Maxwell's equations in that frame
differ from the Maxwell equations which I know? If there is no
difference, then I fear you have just propounded a particular frame
which is no different from any of the other inertial frames one can
think of.

Franz
>
> Paul Stowe

Relevant Pages

  • Re: E-Matrix and Model Mechanics
    ... > description of IRT is included at the end of this post. ... > 1) The laws of physics based on a clock second and light path ... > 3) The laws of physics based on a defined absolute second ... > By definition the speed of light in the rest frame of the ether is as ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:
    ... to assume that he is at rest in absolute space and from this he concludes ... The laws of physics based on a clock second and light path ... and the light path length of a measuring rod has the same ... length of a measuring rod is maximum in the rest frame of the aether. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: OBarr: The Absolute Reference Frame.
    ... our reality, and SR is the correct math for our ... this same clock with absolute velocity of v. ... And LET explains to us why this absolute frame ... reality exists below the measurements, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Article: Group selection, a theory whose time has come...again
    ... single "absolute frame of reference". ... sense but two parts to one same frame, ... reference such that it defined the start and the end to the race. ... Group selection wrongly argues that selecting one B ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... The POR says all inertial frames are ... > respect to "absolute space."' Newton defined absolute space yet was unable ... the inertial frame concept follows from his postulate. ... you remove the basis for the physical existence of "inertial frames", ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast