Re: The theoretical problem of action at a distance


"RP" <no_mail_no_spam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1193610278.086084.114380@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: On Oct 28, 3:40 pm, "Androcles" <Engin...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
: > "RP" <no_mail_no_s...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
: >
: > news:1193602673.809766.108650@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: > :
: > : Reference:
: > :
: > : http://physics.nmt.edu/~raymond/classes/ph13xbook/node143.html
: > :
: > :
: > : "[...]Just what does it mean to say that the total energy and momentum
: > : remain constant with time in the context of relativity? Which time?
: > : The time in which reference frame?"
: >
: > There is only one time for all of them. The question is moot.
:
: Actually it is moot, but not for that reason.

ACTUALLY, IN FACT, There is only one time for all frames
of reference. The question is moot FOR THAT REASON.

: The problem still exists
: in a Galilean context as well, so special relativity has no special
: claim to it.

The problem only exists in your head.


: Your solution is a ballistic model, but there is no accounting for an
: interaction between those bullets and the electrons. When bullets
: collide with an object, the forces generated on the two are due to
: electromagnetic interactions between their constituent charges,
: involving action at a distance between the electrons. If you model
: photons as bullets, then the very intent of the carriers is lost in
: translation. You have closed in the distance, but you haven't
: eliminated it.

I solved the confusion "Which time? The time in which reference frame?",
I made no mention of electrons or carriers or bullets.
--


'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein



http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/tAB=tBA.gif


"I know that in the past Androcles has used tAB=tBA to
claim Einstein thinks tau_AB = tau_BA (the travel
times in the frame in which the clocks at A and B are
moving)." -- Blind "I'm not a troll" Poe.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img21.gif


"Neither [frame] is stationary, which is your problem." -- Blind
"I'm not a troll" Poe.
Ref: news:1189468758.944626.39450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B doesn't equal the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A in the stationary system, obviously.' --
Heretic Jan Bielawski, assistant light-bulb changer.

Ref: news:1188363019.673281.67710@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


"SR is GR with G=0." -- Uncle Stooopid.

The Uncle Stooopid doctrine:
http://sound.westhost.com/counterfeit.jpg

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without
evidence." -- Uncle Stooopid.


"Counterfactual assumptions yield nonsense.
If such a thing were actually observed, reliably and reproducibly, then
relativity would immediately need a major overhaul if not a complete
replacement." -- Humpty Roberts.

Rabbi Albert Einstein in 1895 failed an examination that would
have allowed him to study for a diploma as an electrical engineer
at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule in Zurich
(couldn't even pass the SATs).

According to Phuckwit Duck it was geography and history that Einstein
failed on, as if Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule would give a
damn. That tells you the lengths these lying bastards will go to to
protect their tin god, but its always a laugh when they slip up.
Trolls, the lot of them.

"This is PHYSICS, not math or logic, and "proof" is completely
irrelevant." -- Humpty Roberts.



.