Re: Simple Question About GR And Uniform Acceleration


Tom Roberts wrote:
> Ken S. Tucker wrote:
> > mathexpert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>[accelerated observer] Can we address this simple type
> >>of problem
> >>outside of the umbrella of GR?
> >
> > Yes if you put square pegs in round holes.
> > But the answer is NO to your question, GR is required,
> > and was invented for that reason.
>
> Nonsense. The references I gave all describe this perfectly well in SR,
> and are explicit counterexamples to your claim.

Tom SR does NOT exist, except as a SPECIAL CASE in GR
where UNIFORM VELOCITY is specified, it's kook bait as you
demonstrate.

See Eq(2) and read it this time. <shrug>.
Ken

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: the basis of relativity
    ... Tom Roberts wrote: ... > Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... thats our realistic standard. ... I'll stop here pending dispute of *my* facts. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: G_uv=0 vs G_uv=T_uv
    ... Tom Roberts wrote: ... > Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... >> I hope Dr. Carlip et al, do find the time to clarify the original ... What I'm curious about is the defintion of mass used, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Pauli exclusion principle and blackholes.
    ... >Tom Roberts wrote: ... >> Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... Two particles in a singlet state are a single ... I see two different quantum numbers for S_z. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Nonsymmetric metrics
    ... Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... Tom Roberts wrote: ... If a simple physical contradition existed disproving ... antisymmetrical metrics, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Simple Question About GR And Uniform Acceleration
    ... Ken S. Tucker wrote: ... of problem outside of the umbrella of GR? ... But the answer is NO to your question, GR is required, and was invented for that reason. ... and are explicit counterexamples to your claim. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading