Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- From: "Jeckyl" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2007 14:10:05 +1000
<rotchm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1181097190.121447.208140@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
My view on it...
In LET, as you propose, does space and time remain simple 3D Euclidean
space
and independent absolute time?
yes.
Does all matter physically get shorter (as well as the spaces between
matter) in the direction of travel, and do all clocks physically run
slower
when we consider them moving relative to the absolute ether frame?
Yes.
Is it as if you had adjusted the mechanisms of all clocks to make them
tick
slower, and had put the matter in a vice to make it shorter?
yes.
I.e. as seen from the absolute ether frame is it a physical shortening
and
slowing of clocks?
yes.
If so is it the ether that does this?
Yes. The properties of the fields, or "concentrations" of the fields,
the field potentials due to finite speed of transmission of the
fields...
Or is the shortening and clock slowing that one would see from the ether
frame just an illusion somehow?
No
Just get acquainted with LET an many of its modern analysis.
So the objects moving wrt the ether frame follow the same laws of physics as
objects not moving wrt the ether frame?
If so, imagine a mirror at 45 deg angle to the direction of motion, and a
beam of light at -45 degrees, so that the beam hits the mirror at right
angles and reflects off the mirror back to the source. Now put that
mechanism in motion wrt the ether. so that the mirror shrink enough to make
the angle 30 degrees, and the beam of light comes in at -30 degrees and so
the light reflects at 90 degrees. But from the FoR of the beam+mirror,
nothing appears to have changed, yet the beam of light reflects in the wrong
direction.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- References:
- O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- From: Gerald L. O'Barr
- Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
- O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- Prev by Date: Re: SR WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE?
- Next by Date: Re: Why do quarks in proton way less than neutron's quarks?
- Previous by thread: Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- Next by thread: Re: O'Barr's comments on SR and LET.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|