Re: obvious absolute
From: TomGee (lvlus_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 12/28/04
- Next message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Physicists Losing Their Grip??"
- In reply to: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Next in thread: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Reply: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 27 Dec 2004 18:44:15 -0800
It really seems that you missed the definitions. You can use the term
"absolute" as you use it, even in physics where that is not its meaning
in any physics I have read, but only after you explain your use of it
and not before. Now that you have done that, it is clear that what you
call "absolute whatever" is actually "proper whatever". "Proper
whatever" corresponds to something which belongs or accrues to an
object, while "absolute whatever" usually means the existence of
something which corresponds to universal law.
However, you say that if and when its speed changes, an object's time
rate also changes, and that is correct, as per SR. There are still
some who disagree with that SR claim, but I am not one of them.
You refer to "the local ether", meaning, I think, that you believe
there exists non-local ether, such as where there is no gravitation,
and that is correct also because gravitation does affect the state of
motion of objects within its field, and so we can call that the local
ether as well. However, I do not know what you mean when you say that
the local ether is the local effect of all the masses of the universe.
That would mean you see the ether as an effect of mass and not as a
medium for visible and invisible matter and light.
If you mean that an object's speed is compared to the local ether and
that is called the absolute speed of the object, how can one compare it
to "empty space"? You can say that the speed of an object changed,
nothing wrong with that, no need to compare it to anything unless the
comparison is relavant. Thus, you can say that an object's proper
speed has changed and so its proper time rate has changed also, until
someone questions how you know it changed, then you will have to
explain how you know that.
TomGee
- Next message: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: 1c+1c Closing Velocity of Light and Matter"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Physicists Losing Their Grip??"
- In reply to: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Next in thread: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Reply: beda pietanza: "Re: obvious absolute"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|