Re: Proper quantities in SR

On Jul 3, 8:30 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1183504893.844700.52000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx





On Jul 3, 8:07 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1183500321.661499.143090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jul 3, 10:37 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1183445757.869053.126260@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jul 3, 2:50 am, "rot...@xxxxxxxxx" <rot...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I dunno. To me, "proper" always means "in the object's rest
frame",

That's the general idea but that is not always its meaning in
physics.

Eg. proper time between two events: no "objects" involved; or, is
the
observer the object? If so then proper time is frame dependent and
thus not 'constant', not an absolute quantity.

But "proper mass" (just "mass") has the same value in any frame.

Depending on the definition or context of 'proper', it is not
necessarily an 'absolute'.

Clocks are not affected by motion but a clock moving away from
you will appear to be because light has a finite propagation
speed.

You make it sound like its just an illusion .. its not

You need to address that issue with the theory's author:

<< As judged from K, the clock is moving with the
velocity v; as judged from this reference-body, the
time which elapses between two strokes of the clock
is not one second, but

http://www.bartleby.com/173/M5.GIF

seconds, i.e. a somewhat larger time >>
http://www.bartleby.com/173/12.html

Judgement from K includes a light path of
increasing length.

That is not consistent with your clain that clocks are NOT affected by
motion, and that it just appears that way (some sort of optical illusion)

I supposed you missed that part on that page where it says "As a
consequence
of its motion the clock goes more slowly than when at rest"

Maybe YOU should read more carefully

That interpretation would imply instantaneous light propagaion
over the distance.

Nonsense .. it does nothing of the sort .. please. . try to read and
understand

A racer of 50Km/hr pigeons releases 1 bird every 5 min
from a 100Km/hr truck. His wife at the loft receives the
pigeons at intervals not of 5 min but
"a somewhat larger time" You are suggesting the
someone's watch is responing to the motion and
the finite speed of the birds shouldn't be considered.

Are you as good with primary school maths as you are
with SR?

Sue...





.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Spaceship Question
    ... The observer's state of motion cannot affect the observed ... | is frame dependent, Henry insists that the someone has said ... measurements of the object.....note the 'CAN'. ... If the experimental data does not agree with Henri's hypothesis... ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Spaceship Question
    ... The observer's state of motion cannot affect the observed ... | is frame dependent, Henry insists that the someone has said ... measurements of the object.....note the 'CAN'. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)