Re: Another Rotating Cylinder Problem - explain from moving frame view
- From: sal <pragmatist@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 13:26:28 -0400
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 07:52:09 +0000, David wrote:
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 18:29:50 +0100, "Martin Hogbin"
<goatREMOVETHIS123@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"David" <dseppala@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageHe is none of the above. David's understanding of Einstein's notions so
news:5e5v32hhd167p57ikjfcvnfm82o1thjecu@xxxxxxxxxx
Can anyone explain this rotating disk problem from the point of view of
a moving observer?
Davis Seppala is one of the mysteries of this group. Unlike Spaceman,
for example, he is smart enough to dream up endless SR puzzles, many of
them involving accelerating reference frames, yet by his own admission he
has practically no understanding of SR.
Is he really an expert on the subject testing posters' understanding?
Is he a bunch of psychology students performing some kind of experiment
on us all?
Is he just a troll who delights in stirring up discussion and argument?
Any suggestions?
far is much like David's comprehension of E. M. Escher's drawings. He gets
to points in problems where there seems to be contradictory results as in
his posting on 4/10/2006 where a moving rigid rod is always parallel to
the x-axis and loops about the x-axis in a circular pattern at a 10 meter
diamter circle yet no forces are applied to the rod to make it continue in
this circular pattern. Or in this posting where as tension on a straight
wire increases the center of the wire moves away from a straight line.
This is opposite to typical experiences - wires form straight lines when
stretched from two points with nothing in between them to interfere with
the straight line. This does not make sense to David.
David is accustomed to more educated people pointing out the errors in his
understanding. David really doesn't care whether others think he's a
troll, a moron, a psychologist perform tests, fat, skinny, ugly or
anything else for that matter. David simply finds relativity interesting
but seeks out the help of others in resolving things that don't make sense
to him. He finds it interesting that posters spend time speculating about
his motives but he doesn't find it helpful to himself or others who may
not understand the answers. If the problems are so uninteresting as one
person has posted here why does he read David's postings?
Two reasons, really, or perhaps three.
First, once in a while David posts a problem which I hadn't thought about,
and which I find interesting. Quite some time back (last year, I think)
David posted a contorted question about moving ammeters, and thinking
about it led to some issues I found very interesting. Among other things,
it was in the pursuit of that in which I learned that a resistor's value,
as measured by a "stationary" observer, changes when the resistor is in
motion.
Second, David doesn't get abusive, so one can read and respond to his
posts without getting showered with s*** in payment.
Third, David constantly gives the (possibly deceptive) impression that
he's _about_ to actually learn something from the responses. That is hard
to resist...
As to finding some of David's posts very "ho hum", as I think I've put it
in the past, that's because David has shown a tendency to post the _same_
_thing_ over again, apparently without having made any progress at all in
delving into the particular issue raised by the problem. The moving
ammeter problems, while they were interesting to start with, have been
hashed out pretty thoroughly in this NG in the past, partly as a result of
David posting them. But David does not seem to have learned anything
about them from those earlier discussions, and seems to want to start over
at the beginning again every time. If, as has been suggested repeatedly,
he tried harder to work things out for himself and to take replies to his
posts and carry them forward by adding his own calculations and deductions
rather than stopping at the first difficult spot, he might get farther.
If the answers
are so obvious why not simply post the correct interpretation and help
everyone? Why do you care about David's motives?
After a while, observing David's apparently self-defeating behavior, and
observing his lack of any apparent progress in understanding the issues,
one must start to wonder about his motives.
And besides, guessing motives is part of politics and "politics" among
primitive primate groups, it has been suggested, is what led to the
runaway evolution of the enormously overdeveloped human brain. So,
guessing motives is among the most important traits which distinguishes
human beings from the lower animals. If you expect people to interact with
you without guessing at your motives you will consistently be disappointed.
David
Martin Hogbin
--
Nospam becomes physicsinsights to fix the email
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Maxwells Eqations and Gauge Symetry
- Next by Date: Re: Einstein's dilation derivation. ROFFLMFAO!
- Previous by thread: Re: Another Rotating Cylinder Problem - explain from moving frame view
- Next by thread: Re: Another Rotating Cylinder Problem - explain from moving frame view
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
