Re: Help a layman with a paradox
valls_at_icmf.inf.cu
Date: 02/02/05
- Next message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Who will stun the world as next Einstein?"
- Previous message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: What is Negative Energy ???"
- In reply to: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Next in thread: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Reply: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 2 Feb 2005 11:47:16 -0800
beda pietanza wrote:
> roninfromde@yahoo.com wrote:
> > I hope someone can help me understand this by explaining it without
a
> > lot of advanced math:
> >
> > Motion in space is relative, so if I move away from you, it is not
> > possible to tell if I am accelerating away or decelerating. Or if I
> > move towards you, it is the same as if you were 'moving' towards
me.
> > But I always hear that the faster something goes, the more massive
it
> > becomes as it approaches the speed of light. Why wouldn't the
thing
> > I'm moving away from increase in mass? Or everything in the
universe
> > for that matter? If I think I'm moving away at 99.9999% of c, but
I'm
> > actually slowing down and you are moving away from me at that
speed,
> > who increases in mass?
> >
> > While we're at it, help me with the twin paradox of one twin on a
> > spaceship leaving earth at near c, then returning. Why is only one
> twin
> > older if motion is relative?
> > I hope I explained these well, and I would appreciate your help.
>
> You started the post with a already biased statement: " motion in
> space is relative"
>
> I suggest you to leave the question open :
>
> a)If we assume there is a absolute Space then motion in space is
> absolute.
>
> a)If we assume there is not a absolute Space then the motion in space
> is relative.
>
> Keeping the two visions as two different ways of looking at things
> enable you to appreciate the contributions that two different
> perspectives, in the analyzing a problem, can give you.
>
> Since, even in the absolute vision, the definition of the absolute
> values of speed, mass, energy, or whatever, needs a reference to be
> compared : the absolute is, in the end, relative to what, with more
or
> less ability and precision, we decide to be the absolute Space of
> reference.
>
For my surprise (taking into account other past contacts), I feel close
to your actual discurse (I suggest you to read my answer to the
original post in this thread, maybe you will have a similar feeling).
I propose you to consider a third alternative:
c)If we assume the HIS approach to Relativity, then the motion in space
is both relative and absolute, relative to the absolute space of a HIS.
Relative because it refers to some specific HIS, absolute because
inside the HIS it does not depend on any specific body.
> In the other hand, the relativistic vision is also bounded to copy
with
> the absolute, when instead of using as a reference a single objec, we
> use a large number of objects: enlarging the cluster of objects
versus
> which our relatives are measured, we approach to a form of absolute
> when the cluster of objects is the totality of the objects of the
> universe.
>
This sound to me very similar to my hierarchy of HISes. Running up with
the hierarchy, the body set can approaches the Universe. The Universe
as a limit. But I do not state that that limit exist or not. The limit
may exist, I do not know. I do not consider the center of mass of the
Universe part of my model.
> Hope the above helps.
>
> As far as the twins goes, I can shortly say:
>
> In a relativistic vision each twin, closed in a local box-frame
without
> looking outside, cannot tell the rate of his own aging but can only
> tell that the other twin is aging at a slower rate and this is
> reciprocally true for the other twin also. (this requires a
> conventional peculiar arrangement of the local clocks in both twins
> frame: Esynchro) .
> Important note: though entangled in a definite slowing rate
reciprocity
> the aging rate of the each twin is indefinite.
>
> In a absolute vision, given a (hoping correct) absolute spatial
> reference each twin is aware of his absolute speed and of the
absolute
> speed of the other twin (the relative comes along). In this case the
> different aging rates are evident and are related to the absolute
speed
> of each twin (this requires a peculiar arrangement of the local
clocks
> in accordance of the absolute speed of each twin frame).
> Important note : the aging of each twin is absolute and completely
> independent of the aging of the other.
>
> Hoping this also helps, just remember keep the two visions: if you
will
> proceed correctly the two vision will converge in a unitary vision in
> the end.
>
> Best regards
>
> Beda pietanza
See my previous answer to the original post with my version of the twin
paradox using the HIS approach.
My best desires for a fruitful future contact with you.
Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato (RVHG)
RVHG
- Next message: Ken S. Tucker: "Re: Who will stun the world as next Einstein?"
- Previous message: Creighton Hogg: "Re: What is Negative Energy ???"
- In reply to: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Next in thread: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Reply: beda pietanza: "Re: Help a layman with a paradox"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
