Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)


"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> schreef
in bericht news:DqX7h.192783$Dv2.2704441@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<jan.verheul@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1163931909.484485.71200@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If I am well informed, constant velocity movement causes time delation,
according to Special Relativity. Acceleration causes also time
dilation, according to General Relativity.

From your other postings you seem to be unaware of the
fact that special relativity can handle accelerated motion perfectly.
Perhaps you have been reading old-fashioned literature.
In any case, it seems that you are very badly informed.

Anyone with some
mathematical intuition and some feeling of how nature works can know
now that Relativity (Special as well as General) CANNOT be valid,
without considering the details of both theories.

The thing is, unlike what most retired engineers you'll meet here
think, it doesn't merely take mathematical intuition. It takes much
more than that. This is physics.


Velocity and acceleration are two completely different things, seen
from a mathematical viewpoint. They are related as derivative and
integral to each other. If both constant velocity and constant
acceleration lead to the same phenomena (time delation) you have messed
up things. It would be the same as if both acceleration and constant
velocity would cause (reaction)force.

In the time before Newton and Galilei, people thought that force is
required for both constant velocity and (extra force) for acceleration.
It was not yet discovered that if you remove all drag (which is very
difficult or impossible in practice), constant velocity requires no
force for its maintenance. Twentyfirst physicists should have learned
this lesson. A quantity and its derivative (or integral) CAN NEVER HAVE
the same physical consequences, because they are entirely different
things, and in fact orthogonal. A theory in which a quantity and its
derivative have the same or similar effect (time delation in this case)
can NEVER be consistent.

Acceleration 'causes' change of velocity, right?
Velocity 'causes' time dilation, right?
So acceleration 'causes' change of time dilation, right?
Change of time dilation can 'cause' time dilation, right?
So both Acceleration and Velocity can 'cause' time dilation,
right?
It seems you have a problem with logic.


I have read many textbooks on Special and General Relativity, among
which the text of mister Einstein himself, and the famous "Lectures" of
Feynman.

Ha. Very old-fashioned indeed :-)
You have some serious catching up ahead.

Virtually no writer discriminates consequently between
acceleration because of externally applied force, and acceleration
because of a freefall in a gravitation field. If I understood General
Relativity well, acceleration due to freefall in a gravitation field
causes no time delation because the free falling object is just taking
the "path of least resistance" in warped space.

No, you didn't understand general relativity well.

It is as if it were
inertial. If we take the words of mister Einstein seriously, we can
corner his idiot theory of Special Relativity in less than twenty lines
of plain english text. No equations required.

Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body
(earth or sun or whatever). They are both in the same perfect circular
orbit, however, both clocks are orbiting in exactly the opposite
direction. They meet each other twice during each period of the orbit.
There is a slight difference in both orbits, so that the clocks will
not collide, but will approach each other close enough to synchronize
sufficiently precise.

Both clocks are in freefall in a gravitation field, and so experience
no time delation because of acceleration. In fact, there is no speed
increase, so if there were time delation because of the gravitation
field, it is the same for both clocks, and therefore cancels out.

Both clocks are "inertial" because they both follow the path of least
resistance in warped space. Each clock is constantly moving with regard
to the other. So according to Special Relativity each clock observes
that the other clock walks slower. After the initial synchronization
both clocks meet at the opposite position in the orbit. They compare
clocks. It appears that clock K is ahead of K' and K' is ahead of K...

Peels of laughter......

You seem not to understand special relativity or general
relativity at all.
It does *not* appear that "clock K is ahead of K' and K' is
ahead of K"
If the planet is not rotating, at the events where they meet and
pass each other, they show exactly the same time, but the
clocks appear to each run slower than the other one.
When the clocks are brought together and suddenly stop
moving, they show the same time, and they run at the same
rate.
If the planet is rotating in, let's say, the same direction as one
of the clocks, then it will appear that clock K is ahead of K'
and K' is *behind* of K.


How is it possible that so many intelligent people (at least they
pretend...) cling to theories that are no more than rediculous
nonsense?

How is it possible that so many people misunderstand theories
and then go about attacking the consequences of their personal
misunderstandings?

Billions of dollars have been spend on research projects that
assume Special Relativity as if it were an axiom. Wasted! Mister
Einstein was one of the biggest jokers that science has known. He has
misled the world for more than 100 years (101 if I am well informed)
with a fallacy that is so convoluted that everyone thought it was
brilliant.

Be prepared for the fourth proof of invalidity of SR. This time it will
be a well documented experiment with two atomic clocks in two
airoplanes...

Yes, we've treated that one as well - many times.
I'm curious how you will formulate your misunderstanding of that
one.
You seem to extremely badly informed.
Who informed you and how much time and effort did it take?

Dirk Vdm

here a bit and there a bit ,or in our own words "een hap en een snap",you
know how it goes dirk




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)
    ... Velocity and acceleration are two completely different things, ... I have read many textbooks on Special and General Relativity, ... corner his idiot theory of Special Relativity in less than twenty lines ... Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)
    ... |> If I am well informed, constant velocity movement causes time delation, ... Acceleration causes also time ... | fact that special relativity can handle accelerated motion perfectly. ... |> Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)
    ... |> If I am well informed, constant velocity movement causes time delation, ... Acceleration causes also time ... |> corner his idiot theory of Special Relativity in less than twenty lines ... |> Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)
    ... Velocity and acceleration are two completely different things, ... required for both constant velocity and for acceleration. ... corner his idiot theory of Special Relativity in less than twenty lines ... Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)
    ... fact that special relativity can handle accelerated motion perfectly. ... Velocity and acceleration are two completely different things, ... I have read many textbooks on Special and General Relativity, ... Consider two clocks K and K' that are in orbit around some heavy body ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)