Re: Faster than Light?
- From: "Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 05:07:42 GMT
"Peri of Pera" <riedt1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1161403273.419333.208490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Sorcerer wrote:
| > "Peri of Pera" <riedt1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1161230538.940020.97710@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | Faster than Light?
| > |
| > | The theory of relativity claims that the motion of physical objects
| > | cannot exceed a speed of 300,000km/sec. However, we know from
| > | experience (e.g. equatorial rocket launchings, multistage rocket
| > | vehicles etc) that the final velocity of objects is their starting
| > | velocity plus their own velocity. There is no reason to believe a
| > | maximum applies.
| > |
| > | A spaceship travels away from star X at a speed of 300,000km/sec (v1).
| > | The spaceship fires off a rocket from its nose. It has a velocity of
| > | 100km/sec (v2). The speed of the rocket is now 300,100km/sec (v1+v2),
| > | i.e. the rocket travels away from star X at 300,100km/sec. Special
| > | relativity however demands it can only be 300,000km/sec, the maximum
| > | velocity allowed by the theory. This is only possible if the speed of
| > | the rocket is reduced to zero or the speed of the space ship at the
| > | moment of the firing is reduced to 299,900km/sec or a combination of
| > | the two. SR, by insisting on the maximum speed limit, requires the
| > | reduction in the existing speeds and assumes that it does happen. It
| > | cannot provide evidence or even a theory to explain how the reduction
| > | is possible or occurs except that the Dutch physicist Lorentz asserted
| > | that all bodies in motion are subject to the Lorentz transforms. As a
| > | consequence, their length contracts in proportion to their speed,
their
| > | time is slowed down reciprocally to the length decrease and their mass
| > | increases until at the speed of c, length and time equals zero, mass
is
| > | infinite and no greater velocity than c is possible. The transforms
| > | were invented to account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley
| > | experiment (MMX) which compared the times taken by a ray of light in
| > | the direction of the motion of the earth and perpendicularly to it
over
| > | an equal distance. The relativity pioneer Poincare wrote in his 1897
| > | paper 'The Relativity of Space' Quote: Lorentz could have accounted
| > | for the facts (of the null result of MMX) by supposing that the
| > | velocity of light is greater in the direction of the earth's motion
| > | than in the perpendicular direction. He preferred to admit that the
| > | velocity is the same in the two directions, but that bodies are
smaller
| > | in the former than in the latter. End of quote. However, Lorentz had a
| > | third choice to account for the null result. He could have assumed
that
| > | instead of a contraction of the parallel arm of the MMX interferometer
| > | equipment, an expansion of the perpendicular arm had taken place. This
| > | would also have explained the null result with equal justification but
| > | the three relativistic effects would have been reversed - i.e.
| > | proportionally to the speed, the perpendicular arm and time would have
| > | expanded and the mass would have been reduced. Needless to say that
| > | both contraction and expansion conjectures are untenable. The solution
| > | to the null result of MMX is quite different.
| > |
| > | Peter Riedt
| > |
| > | Ps If you like fairytales, download one from
| > | www.freewebs.com/djingatilla
| >
| >
| > We are sorry, this page was not found.
|
| Zaubermeister, the Internet is supposed to be a vehicle for the freedom
| of expression but sometimes it is not. Try www.freewebs.com/djingattila
| outside of Google or www.freewebs.com and then ask for djingattalia or
| sinomore. Thanks for your information.
|
| Peter Riedt
Ok, thanks. It worked today.
I had to give up after a paragraph, it reminded me of "See Spot run".
It's just my personal taste but I take the view that sentences should be
neither too clipped nor too long in literature lest the reading thereof
becomes a chore and detracts from the amusement.
.
- References:
- Faster than Light?
- From: Peri of Pera
- Re: Faster than Light?
- From: Sorcerer
- Re: Faster than Light?
- From: Peri of Pera
- Faster than Light?
- Prev by Date: Re: Faster than Light?
- Next by Date: Re: mass increase due to speed
- Previous by thread: Re: Faster than Light?
- Next by thread: Re: Faster than Light?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
