Re: Question about light clock and derivation of time dilation


"Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dargis0a86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Androcles says...
>
>>Look.
>>We can return to the moon, but not to Neil Armstrong planting a
>>footprint in 1979.
>
> So what? The fact that there is a vector with components
>
> x=0
> y=0
> z=0
> t=-26

The FACT that there ISN'T any such vector except in your mind
means you CAN'T go to any event it describes, but you CAN go to
x = -1
y = 0,
z = 0
t = 2.

Or you can go to
x = 0
y = 0
z = 0
t = 2006
without moving a muscle.

Stay right where you are, 2006 WILL come to you.

> doesn't imply that we can *move* in that direction. The laws
> of physics determine which vectors are possible displacement
> vectors for a physical object, and not all of them are.

The laws of a vector space determine that time is not a vector,
it has no inverse.

Physics has mathematical laws.
Relativity isn't physics, it is gobbledygook, a thought experiment,
a gedanken, a figment of your imagination, and it has its own set of
self-contradictory rules for the quasi-world in which you and other
crazy people live in.


>
> For a material object of nonzero mass, it is only possible
> to go from event A with coordinates x_A, y_A, z_A, t_A to
> event B with coordinates x_B, y_B, z_B, t_B if
>
> (1) t_A < t_B

That's it. Well done.
(x1,y1,z1, B) cannot be subtracted from (x2,y2,z2, A), it's an illegal
operation.
Time is not a vector, t_A < t_B.

> (2) (x_B - x_A)^2 + (y_B - y_A)^2 + (z_B - z_A)^2 < c^2 (t_B -
> t_A)^2
>
>>Let (x1,y1,z1,t1) be a 4-vector.
>>Let (x2,y2,z2,t2) be a 4-vector.
>>
>>Add the vectors.
>>(x1-x2, y1-y2, z1-z2, t1-t2)
>>
>>Put in numbers
>>x1 = y1 = z1 = t1 = 1
>>x2 = y2 = z2 = t2 = -1
>>(1-1,1-1,1-1, 1-1) = (0,0,0,0)
>>
>>I've now moved from (1,1,1, 1pm)
>>to (0,0,0, midday) and gone backwards in time.
>
> No, you haven't.

Of course I haven't, there is no t = -1.

>
> The fact that I can construct a vector from
> here to Alpha Centauri doesn't mean that I've
> travelled to Alpha Centauri.

Of course you can, only time and money prevent it.
Mathematics doesn't.

> You seem to be confused about the difference
> between adding vectors and travelling through
> spacetime. You'll never get to Alpha Centauri
> by adding vectors.

I'd like to see you raise your hand WITHOUT adding vectors.
Androcles.


.

Relevant Pages

  • R*volume*raduis2 c3po "Theroy of everything"
    ... then do it over agian ever law is wrong all physics math and geometry ... generate new laws of den's and math and quantum and stellar physics ... In our universe or any ...
    (sci.physics)
  • R*volume*raduis2 c3po "Theroy of everything"
    ... then do it over agian ever law is wrong all physics math and geometry ... generate new laws of den's and math and quantum and stellar physics ... In our universe or any ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • R*volume*raduis2 c3po "Theroy of everything"
    ... then do it over agian ever law is wrong all physics math and geometry ... generate new laws of den's and math and quantum and stellar physics ... In our universe or any ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Hobbas misconceptions
    ... >>> invariance of all systems of physical equations which express general ... Form invariance is covariance, ... No current book on physics claims it does. ... >> POR - The laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Significance (contd)
    ... but rather from a version of functionalism. ... predictions as to what those laws governing behaviour would be, ... laws of physics are at the time. ... Functionalism makes certain predictions. ...
    (talk.origins)