Re: The reasons why SR is an aether theory


kenseto wrote:
> "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1136838875.533237.272880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > kenseto wrote:
> > > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > news:1136656236.606918.112190@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > >
> > > > kenseto wrote:
> > > > > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > > > > news:1136564682.065129.28920@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > >
> > > > > A moving source has a different state of absolute motion than the
> > > observer
> > > > > and thus it is in a different frame than the observer.
> > > >
> > > > You apparently do not understand what a frame of reference is. If
> there
> > > > are three objects A, B, and C, all with relative motion with respect
> to
> > > > each other, and there are two frames of reference S and S', both with
> > > > relative motion with respect to each other, then all three objects A,
> > > > B, and C appear in both reference frames S and S'.
> > >
> > > Hey idiot.....A, B and C are different frames. You can rename them S, S'
> and
> > > S" if you like.You can say that B and C are "moving in" A's frame but
> you
> > > can't say that B and C are "in" A's frame.
> >
> > Hey idiot yourself.... A, B, and C are objects. Objects are not frames.
> > Frames are not objects. A, B, and C *live in* frames of reference. You
> > apparently do not know what a frame of reference is.
>
> Hey idiot.....A,B and C can be observers.

That's right. Observers are objects.

> Each is "in" his own frame of
> reference.

No. Each observer is in every frame of reference. The "observer's frame
of reference" is *customarily* taken to be the one he is at rest in.
This does not mean that he does not appear in the other frames of
reference as well. It should also be noted that there are an infinite
number of frames of reference that any given observer is at rest in,
all with different origins and choices for the coordinate axes.

> Any object at rest in A's frame is "in" A's frame.

No. It is at rest in A's frame of reference, as customarily chosen. A
is also in the the other frames of reference as well, it just isn't at
rest in them.

> Each of them
> can imagine a grid of synchronized clocks extending from him to infinity in
> all directions and he can call the grid of clocks his frame of reference.

No. The grid of clocks is a grid of clock at rest in his frame of
reference. The frame of reference is a *coordinate system*, not a
collection of objects.

> That means that when A sees relative motion wrt B his grid of clocks is in
> relative motion wrt B's grid of clocks.

No, once more. When A sees relative motion wrt to B, it means he looks
at B and sees that he is either approaching or receding. Period.

You have a lousy concept of what a frame of reference is. You are under
the mistaken impression that there is one and only one frame of
reference per observer and that this observer is the only observer that
appears in it. Crapola.

PD

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... >>in motion relative to himself to shrink, and measures clocks in motion ... you are saying that Einstein assumed the observer using the Lorentz ... same speed in all directions in his own frame. ... plugging numbers into the Lorentz transformation, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... >>in motion relative to himself to shrink, and measures clocks in motion ... you are saying that Einstein assumed the observer using the Lorentz ... same speed in all directions in his own frame. ... plugging numbers into the Lorentz transformation, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... but can B define "light path length" in his frame by looking only at ... moving stick is moving parallel to a ruler which is at rest in B's ... >>clocks to measure the time, he will get a different time for the light ... assuming that each observer defines coordinates by the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: IRT: A New Theory of Relativity
    ... but can B define "light path length" in his frame by looking only at ... moving stick is moving parallel to a ruler which is at rest in B's ... >>clocks to measure the time, he will get a different time for the light ... assuming that each observer defines coordinates by the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity
    ... If the front of the train is x'=1, and the rear of the train ... reference of the track, then supposedly you have a little short train ... simultaneity says that in the frame of reference of the train, ... before the second mark is made as seen by an observer on the train. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast