Re: SR fundamental contradiction


<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159879051.169882.3140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159791347.852389.224720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159737966.456569.228880@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159692403.878602.225890@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159612637.044922.196540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
<mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1159535570.216186.311940@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[snip repetitive demonstrations of your imbecility]

Where does the length of the stick come from, if not from
the LT x' = g(c-v)t ?

Hey, retard, when I tell you to imagine a stick of length 5, do
you ask where 5 comes from?
Yes, that figures. Okay, I'll tell you a secret: it comes out of thin air.
How is that?

You said:

"For this event E, as seen in S', the light signal has covered the
distance
x' = c t' = g (c - v) t
This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame.

Now imagine a stick with this particular length
x' = g (c-v) t
at rest in the S' frame."

And now, you claim that its length comes out of thin air!

Again, you forgot my opening line:
| Consider the event E on the light signal with x = c t for some
| chosen value of t.
"For some chosen value of t"... that's your thin air.


You are a stupid liar!

I'm sorry, but you are too stupid to be qualified to know whether
someone is lying to you or not.
That is quite Amusing :-)

Of course, one can choose any value for t. What counts is the
formula x' = g (c-v) t, which means that the distance x = (c-v)t
measured in the S-frame is *dilated* by g in the S'-frame, whereas
it should be *contracted* by 1/g.

No, Marcel, it does not.
the formula x' = g (c-v) t is not what counts.
What counts is the meanings of the variables.
What counts is that you never understood them and you never
will. You invested too heavily in failing to understand, remember?
http://perso.orange.fr/mluttgens/

The meaning of the variables is clear to everybody, and should be
clear, even to you.

Alas, clearly not clear to you ;-)
http://perso.orange.fr/mluttgens/LTfalse.htm
http://perso.orange.fr/mluttgens/twinpdx1.htm
http://perso.orange.fr/mluttgens/mmx.htm
and
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/LuttRel.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/DidntUseSR.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SpeedV.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/NegativeCrap.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/ApplyDerivation.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SRSymbols.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/CorrectRelations.html
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SRLuttgens.html

Dirk Vdm

Van de Moortel wrote in
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Fumblamental.html

"Consider the event E on the light signal with x = c t for some
chosen value of t.
Then c t - v t is the distance between the origin of S' (the 'moving
observer') and the light signal, as seen at time t in the S-frame
(the 'stationary frame'), and, by the way, so c - v is by definition
the closing velocity between the two.

For this event E, as seen in S', the light signal has covered the
distance
x' = c t' = g (c - v) t
This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame."


Let's imagine a stick with length
x = (c-v) t = ct - vt
at rest in the S frame.

Logically, the length of the stick corresponds to the distance
between two points fixed in S, which are occupied by the ends
of the stick simultaneously, i.e. at the same time t.

The coordinates of those two points in the S-frame are:

x2 = c t (the light signal, as seen at time t in the S-frame) and
x1 = v t (the origin of S', as seen at time t).

In S', the corresponding coordinates are, according to the LT:

x2' = c t' = g (c - v) t and
x1' = 0.

Hence the length of the stick in S' is given by
x2' - x1' = g (c - v) t.

No. Length of a moving stick must be measured by taking the
distances to the end points simultaneously.
The events (t,x1) and (t,x2) are not simultanous in frame S':

{ x1' = g ( x1 - v t ) = g ( v t - v t ) = 0
{ t1' = g ( t - v x1 /c^2) = g ( t - v v t / c^2 ) = t / g

{ x2' = g ( x2 - v t ) = g ( v t - c t ) = g (c-v) t
{ t2' = g ( t - v x2 /c^2) = g (t - v c t / c^2) = t sqrt(1-v/c) / sqrt(1+v/c)

Noone (in his right mind) would call x2' - x1' the length of the stick,
since x1' and x2' are distances at *different* times in the S'-frame,
as you can see.

In your right mind, what is the length of the stick in the S'-frame, if
not
g (c - v) t ?

(c-v) t / g

You should of course demonstrate your solution.
Notice that if you find any value different from (c-v)t/g, the
Lt is false. And don't try to escape by telling me that SR has no
solution.

Sigh.
So your stick has length in the S-frame = dx = (c-v) t, with some
chosen value for t. You want t = 5? You get t = 5.

Since the stick is at rest in S, the end-points can be measured
at any time, so dt for the measuring events doesn't matter.
Since the stick is moving in S', the end-points must be taken
simultaneously in S, so the measuring events must have dt' = 0.
Transformation:
{ dx' = g ( dx - v dt ) [1]
{ dt' = g ( dt - v dx / c^2 ) [2]
or
{ dx = g ( dx' + v dt' ) [3]
{ dt = g ( dt' + v dx' / c^2 ) [4]

You want a connection between dx' and dx, where dt' is known
to be 0, so the simplest way to go about is with equation [3], giving
dx = g dx'
and thus
dx' = dx / g

So the length in S' is (c-v) t / g.
So I don't find a value different from (c-v) t / g.

A stick has a length L in its rest frame.
When measured from a moving frame, that stick has length L / g.
What can be so difficult about that?

The fact that you have to get this spelled out in such trivial
detail, shows that - after at least 10 years - you *still*
haven't understood the meaning of the variables.
Aren't you *embarrassed* by that? You should be.

Dirk Vdm


.

Relevant Pages