Re: About the Galilei principle of the relativity

On Feb 2, 7:37 am, "sciencec...@xxxxxxxxxxx" <sciencec...@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Feb 1, 8:24 am, "Stamenin" <task...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Jan 31, 2:10 pm, "Bill Hobba" <rubb...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Stamenin" <task...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1170118485.483679.17300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jan 29, 7:24 am, "surrealistic-dr...@xxxxxxxxxxx" <surrealistic-
d...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 28, 4:30 pm, "Stamenin" <task...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

WHAT THE GALILEI PRINCIPLE OF THE RELATIVITY SAYS INDIRECTLY

From the definition of the principle of the relativity we can draw
some very important conclusions, which can be used for the
clarification of the errant suppositions done by Einstein at the
foundation of the G.R. The definition says: all the laws of the
mechanics are identical in the coordinate systems that are moving in a
right line and with constant speed. From this definition result
indirectly that the laws of the mechanics are no identical in
coordinate system which are in the following states of motion:
1) In coordinate systems which are rotating relative to the far
stars.
2) In coordinate systems which are in an accelerated motion and in
a
right line direction.
An example of the first case is the coordinate system attached to the
earth surface.
We can't study the motion of the sun and the planets by this
coordinate system because of the rotation of this system relative to
the far stars.
The second case is of a greater importance, and I'd like to analyze it
through an example.
Let us suppose that we are in a cabin of a train in accelerated
motion. If we let a stone to fall down freely, the stone will not fall
in a vertical direction but will fall backwardly. If the train will be
in a uniform motion with constant speed, the stone will fall down
vertically, and if the train will stay at the earth the stone falls
again vertically. Why it is so? It is so, because the earth surface is
in an inertial motion for a horizontal plan. The motion of the train
is the same an inertial motion when it goes with a constant speed
relative to the earth. This comparative conclusion is done accordingly
to the Galilei principle of the relativity. But in the accelerated
train, the stone at the moment we let it free, it started to respect
the coordinate system attached to the earth, by continuing his motion
with the speed that hade at that moment. The train being in
accelerated motion, the stone relatively to the train remains
backwardly.
This experiment shows clearly that an accelerated coordinate system
can't be used for the description of the motion of the inertial
bodies. The material bodies simply being let free in it do not respect
such a system.
Einstein by assuming the principle of the equivalence of the inertial
force with the gravitational field didn't respect jus the Galilei
principle of the relativity. And to avoid any discussions about this,
he was obligated to change and the definition of this principle. In
his GR the definition of the general principle of the relativity is:
All Gaussian coordinate systems are essentially equivalent for the
formulation of the general laws of the nature.
In this definition are very strange and confused the following
formulations:
Gaussian coordinate system (is the differential equation),
Essentially equivalent systems, (what is nonessential system in
opposite to this), the general laws of the nature (which are the
partial laws of the nature). All these formulations are very vague.
In this situation the only right conclusion is that if we exclude
these three mistaken modifications done by Einstein, remains nothing
of the general relativity.
That is why I have concluded in a previous topic that the
Einstein theory of the relativity special and general must be
criticized in its basic suppositions and not in its conclusions.
28/01/2007Einstein asked himself this question, which I ask you: Why
should the
equations that describe metrical phenomena depend ultimately on the
reference frame in which the measurements of the phenomena are made?
Einstein could see no a priori reason why they should. So he posited
the notion of the 'general laws of physics', and he generalized the
Galilean Principle of Relativity (which applied to the laws of
mechanics of Newton, where time, velocity, and acceleration were
treated as absolute) and the SR principle of relativity (which applied
to the laws of electrodynamics -- in 1905, anyway, where only
acceleration was treated as absolute) to this:

For all metrical phenomena accessible to humans via measurement, there
will be found descriptive equations of the behavior of that phenomena
(i.e., 'the general laws of physics') that have the same form in all
reference frames. This is called the Principle of General Covariance,
which Einstein was able to use heuristically in his so-called theory
of general relativity.

In other words, Einstein supposed that the descriptive equations of
all phenomena could be realized without the NEED to assume absolute
time, space, velocity, or acceleration ---- at least not absolute in
the sense that it meant classically (i.e., according to Galileo and
Newton, which were concepts primarily associated with spaces).

All of you or don't understand what I say or don't like to know. There
is so big confusion in your arguments that I believe that you aren't
interested about the truth but with insults to make stop writing obout
these phenomena. So I ask you why are you so angry?

I am not sure if the person you are responding to is angry or not but the
reason myself, and probably others as well, are annoyed at the stuff you
write is it is meaningless nonsense. Have you ever considered, since you
seem to be the only one 'who understands what you say', that you are not
thinking clearly enough?

Bill

I have to say, it doesn't merit to continue any discution. You can
keep your opinions and I myne.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Einstein used the Galieo's principle of relativity in his June 1905
paper.
This paper for ready reference is available at

www.ajayonline.us


Go way, Ajay.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: About the Galilei principle of the relativity
    ... coordinate system which are in the following states of motion: ... An example of the first case is the coordinate system attached to the ... to the Galilei principle of the relativity. ... Einstein by assuming the principle of the equivalence of the inertial ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: About the Galilei principle of the relativity
    ... coordinate system which are in the following states of motion: ... An example of the first case is the coordinate system attached to the ... to the Galilei principle of the relativity. ... Einstein by assuming the principle of the equivalence of the inertial ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: About the Galilei principle of the relativity
    ... coordinate system which are in the following states of motion: ... An example of the first case is the coordinate system attached to the ... to the Galilei principle of the relativity. ... Einstein by assuming the principle of the equivalence of the inertial ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Aether and Absolute space
    ... law of inertia is the fact that all motion is relative. ... It does no matter whether on uses Einstein's relativity or Newton's ... to and beyond Einstein. ... Maxwell's electrodynamics could not, for example, explain ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: The Cosmological Principle
    ... attempting to explain apparent retrograde motion!. ... For Einstein, they were clearly part of God's thoughts. ... - relativity, ... Maxwell's electrodynamics could not, for example, explain ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)