Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen <alen1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 06:51:14 -0700
On Jun 10, 7:16 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 9, 8:06 pm, Alen <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
*sigh*
Rotate a rod at an angle. It appears smaller.
Same thing
That's OK if you are talking about ordinary space. Light travels
to the observer from both ends of the rod. Does this also happen
in spacetime? In this case, light is travelling along the time axis
of the moving frame. Is this the case?
Who knows? It isn't worth the effort of thinking about.
Principle of relativity gives you 3 viable group structures. Maxwell's
equations picks out SO(3,1) - relativity. Using Maxwell to determine
the magnitude of the invariant speed is all the thinking of light that
is required,
If light does travel in this way, the result still qualifies as
a projection of the moving length from the rotated moving
frame onto the stationary frame. This means that length
contraction will be observed, whatever method is used to
measure a moving length. On my webpage I have shown that
this is impossible.
Congratulations, nobody cares.
All this babble about light simply clouds the issue. Relativity is
geometry. Stop thinking in terms of Einstein's 1905 paper and start
thinking in terms of geometry.
I am sorry. I know that the maths and geometry has beauty,
neatness, completeness, and computational success, and
I can understand why a person might not want to spoil it with
difficulties based on a physical perspective, and might distrust
such an approach.
But all that is of no use if the reality doesn't agree. You are not
of course, obliged to be involved in an enquiry into the physical
implications, and are free to trust in the geometric theory. But
I believe that I am on to something at the level of the physical
reality, and I won't let it go until I know where it leads to. And
I believe that I already have some idea as to where it will lead.
Alen
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- References:
- THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Phil
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Alen
- Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- From: Eric Gisse
- THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- Prev by Date: About gravitation particles & star formation.
- Next by Date: Re: O'Barr: Modifications of SR have begun.
- Previous by thread: Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- Next by thread: Re: THE PHYSICAL TRANSFORMATION EQUATIONS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|