Re: Relativity: Einstein's lost frame

On Jun 21, 8:21 pm, Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Surfer wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:24:28 -0700, harry <harald.vanlin...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Jun 20, 9:48 am, Surfer <sur...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Which leads me to think that absolute motion, special relativity
effects and Lorentz symmetry might all be compatible.
That is correct and all well-informed people here know that: it has
been discussed and re-explained for years (are you really new here?).

But then, this "absolute motion" is completely unobservable, and the
"compatibility" is only for theories that are essentially useless and
FAR more difficult to work with than SR (in which you can select any
convenient inertial frame, not just the "one, true, frame").

Hmmm... only if one chooses to overlook Lorentz-Poincare relativity,
in which one can select any convenient frame for calculations.
Langevin stressed that relativity has more "absolute" effects than
Newtonian relativity and that it is easy to understand with that
interpretation.

In particular, this "absolute motion" that is compatible with SR is not
at all the "absolute motion" of Newton or Maxwell. Beware of PUNs.

To the contrary, Lorentz's ether was very much like Newton's "absolute
space" (motion relative to a medium is called "absolute").

I have tended to neglect relativity in favor of
QM. So it is a very interesting learning experience.

SR is a piece of cake compared to QM (though it's not trivial, as the
many people around here display daily). GR is a rather different story....

Yes indeed - QM is a real challenge.

Harald


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: process physics (was Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits)
    ... > no physical effect which could depend on that absolute motion, ... > clock synchronization ritual is pretty much irrelevant to relativity. ... >>different way of understanding the origin of space, the quantum etc. ... >>This is far from complete as even Cahill readilly admits. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: process physics (was Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits)
    ... > no physical effect which could depend on that absolute motion, ... > clock synchronization ritual is pretty much irrelevant to relativity. ... >>different way of understanding the origin of space, the quantum etc. ... >>This is far from complete as even Cahill readilly admits. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Relativity Allows Us To Measure Absolute Motion?
    ... :> Thinking about the supposed lack of absolute motion one day, ... We can just use Special Relativity. ... :> rods, we end up back where we started. ... :> clocks at the ends of these measuring rods, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is there life beyond Relativity?
    ... complete theory that includes relativity includes relativity as a ... absolute motion. ... To do that C will have to decelerate wrt the B ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Is there life beyond Relativity?
    ... complete theory that includes relativity includes relativity as a ... absolute motion. ... from another object has higher absolute motion. ... hey idiot....how can C dock with B without deceleration? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)