Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:37:00 -0700
On Jul 4, 12:05 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1183517894.351444.34530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 3, 11:32 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
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 responding to the motion and
the finite speed of the birds shouldn't be considered.
Not at all . when considering question of light propagation, you need toSo if we substitute light for the birds the watches will
take the speed that light travels into account.
go bonkers?
You might .. but I think I'll survive just fine.
What problem do you see when light is involved?
You are the one claiming that clocks get funny for
light but not for racing pigeons.
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 responding to the motion and
the finite speed of the birds shouldn't be considered.
Actually I don't think you ever said the racer's watch
wasn't going slower to explain his wifes observations
so for all I know your sense of reality is as strange
as your maths.
But we were talking about clocks and lengths. Not about light
propagation.
The slowing of clocks and contracting of length as projected into another
relatively moving frame of reference is not some optical illusions due to
the speed the light is travelling. Even if you COULD instantaneously get
information about the lengths and clocks, you'd still end up with length
contraction and time dilation being 'seen'.
People get instantaneous information about clocks and rods
thousands of times a day.
No ..they don't .. you cannot get information faster then the speed of
light.
One station knows of the arrival of a code at another station
an ocean away, within 10 ns. That is only time for light
to propagte ~3 metres.
http://tf.nist.gov/time/commonviewgps.htm
http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/12...well probably not on your side of the looking
glass where sentence precedes verdict.
Eh?
Are you as good with primary school maths as you are
with SR?
Yes .. equally proficient. SR is not really that difficult .. you shouldI AM trying.
try to understand it too .. you might get it one day.
I'm glad. Keep it up. despite your off-topic posts, you are obviously and
intelligent person
If I can just figure out how the pigeon droppings get into
the racers watch to slow it, everything will be much clearer.
Sue...
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- References:
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: rotchm@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Sue...
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Sue...
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Sue...
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Sue...
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Sue...
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Proper quantities in SR
- Prev by Date: Re: quasar accretion disk question
- Next by Date: Re: The demise of SR.
- Previous by thread: Re: Proper quantities in SR
- Next by thread: Re: Proper quantities in SR
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|