Re: About absolute reference frame......

"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mO%Yf.62411$H71.9434@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In modern physics, all of our fundamental theories obey the Principle of
Relativity, which says that the local laws of physics do not depend on
which locally-inertial frame one references them to.

Let me ask the question from a different angle. In a local frame of
reference, what would constitute a new law of physics? Would
observations of different values of constants such as G, c, h be
considered as such? Given GR's creation of curvature in space as well
as gravitational time dilation, would the curvature in space constitute
a change in the local law of physics?

Principle of
Relativity is based on a few equations of Lorentz Transform.

You got that backwards.

So, you are saying Lorentz Transform is based on Special Relativity as
well as Lorentz's personal version of Aether Theory. OK, let's back
up. What do you mean by Principle of Relativity? Do you mean SR as
well as LET? Or just SR? Or just LET? Or neither?

This is a
principle by votes among all the judges similar to a beauty pagent.

Not at all.

According to one source of definitions of the word principle, we have

"A basic generalization that is ACCEPTED as true and that can be used
as a basis for reasoning or conduct"

It sounds like when you run into something you cannot explain but know
that you are right, you just call it a principle. To accept such a
postulate, you need an almost universal consent among your peers. It
sure sounds like this procedure is very similar to a beauty pagent.

Even in Galilean Tranfrom, if there is an absolute frame of reference,
there is no special laws applied that other frames don't get. In
Newtonian physics, this is very much to be the case too. So, I am
still very confused on the significance you place over this absolute
frame of reference and pooh-pooh it.

"absolute" in the sense that a frame is unique, has no interest. Any
frame has that property.

Every point in spacetime has its own curvature according to GR. So,
you don't call that each point being unique. Why?

"absolute" in the sense that the laws of physics are different in one
frame than in any other is not part of modern physics.

You keep making the statement that the laws are different. What
constitutes as difference in law? Please give examples.

By the way, please prove Newton's law of gravity would fail in your
concept of absolute reference.

I have no "concept of absolute reference". <shrug>

So, why do you keep pooh-pooh-ing the concept of absolute frame of
reference if you don't even know what it is? What type of laws of
physics it would violate? etc.

In particular, the CMBR dipole=0 frame is "absolute" in the sense that
at the location of earth it is a specific locally-inertial frame. But it
is not "absolute" in the sense that the laws of physics are any
different in it than in other locally-inertial frames (this was the
meaning of "absolute" in ~century old aether theories, among others; all
have been soundly refuted by experiments). That frame is no more
"absolute" than is the locally-inertial frame in which the sun is at
rest. Or my little finger.

The laws of physics should apply to every frame of reference. This
point is as fundamental as all the principles you have presented.

Yes. That is the PoR. As I said.

the argument is whether the dipole of
CMBR does indicate the existence of the Aether. At a first glance,
there is no connection.

Yes. Even after many glances no connection appears. Some people around
here _dream_ of a connection....

While some people around here dream of a connection between the dipole
of CMBR and the absolute frame of reference just like Newton did dream
aboout the laws of gravity, you have not demonstrated how silly things
would be if there is really an absolute frame of reference. You are
just criticizing farce. <shrug>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... Cartesian coordinates S to represent the frame of reference of the ... where it is reflected by the mirror. ... Nobody knows the essence of the physics they are talking ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... Cartesian coordinates S to represent the frame of reference of the ... where it is reflected by the mirror. ... Nobody knows the essence of the physics they are talking ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... Cartesian coordinates S to represent the frame of reference of the ... where it is reflected by the mirror. ... Nobody knows the essence of the physics they are talking ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... Cartesian coordinates S to represent the frame of reference of the ... where it is reflected by the mirror. ... Nobody knows the essence of the physics they are talking ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Galilean transformation explanation of MMX
    ... Cartesian coordinates S to represent the frame of reference of the ... where it is reflected by the mirror. ... �Nobody knows the essence of the physics they are talking ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)