Re: The real twin paradox.

On Dec 4, 8:09 am, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote innews:5d2cac2e-2244-452b-b4e1-cd72dfad444d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

[...]

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
He concludes that the laws of relative motion apply to light, to
electrons and to all ponderable masses.
We of course know that is not true.
Light beams would replace thrusters if it were.

'WE' do NOT know that.

I am betting on Newton's third law.


first, the statement I gave above says NOTHING about imponderable masses
such as light exerting pressure so your response is off target. second,
light DOES exert pressure. finally, the use of high intensity light beams
as a rocket thruster (as opposed to using ground based lasers to push
payloads into space) is prohibited by two laws:
1) the law against using
high energy beam weapons to destroy launch pads (the ship would vaporize
the launch pad) and
2) the batteries to drive the laser are kind of
heavy.
I have worked with a 500 Watt CW laser. It would take a small
moving van to move it with another for the 20,000 volt at 20 amp power
supply.

It would only produce 500 Newton meters/second of thrust, or 369
ft lbf/s of force.

Hardly enough to accelerate the power supply plus laser plus sue-bungee-
type extension cord.

Yes, nuclear fusion could supply enough power to make it worth while, but
we might as well use the laser and the fusion reaction to push the 'ash'
[helium] away and gain even more of a boost.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_pressurehttp://www.u.arizona.edu/~lilley98/

[quotehttp://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=694]
The existence of light pressure was demonstrated as theoretically possible
by James Clerk Maxwell in 1873. Confirming laboratory experiments waited
until the turn of the century. [unquote]

[quotehttp://www.livescience.com/technology/070327_laser_jet.html]
Physicists know that the heat of lasers can move liquid. But this test
found that the light itself, not heat, did the pushing. [unquote]

[quotehttp://www.springerlink.com/content/rx72j316032p4148/]
Summary Attention is paid to the effect of light pressure, completely
ignored in the present explanations on the energetics of dynamical
processes in atmosphere. It seems even to be of great importance and play
a great role, especially in the upper atmosphere. It seems there are three
phenomena produced probably by this process: 1) Appearing of the earth
atmosphere tide on the night side. 2) Presence of strong west winds on the
great altitude. 3) Vertical oscillations of the upper atmosphere density.
[unquote]

[quotehttp://www.esc.cam.ac.uk/Library/Journals/J.Conf.Abs./1/222.html]
Contrary to bigger meteoroids which are controlled by gravitational
interactions dynamics of submicron-sized particles is dominated by
radiation pressure and by electromagnetic interactions with the
interplanetary magnetic field. [unquote]

Finally, to see light pressure in action, just observe the tails of
comets. They always point away from the sun because the pressure of the
light drives them away from the sun. [that is not to say that the solar
particle 'wind' has no effect, but the effect seen is the sum of several
effects INCLUDING light pressure].

....

None of these ~possibilities~ excuse the errors in gauge
selection and transformation. Making light a function of
inertia also makes it difficult to make inertia a function
of light.




Conformablily with popular notions does not justfiy
the use of Lorenz gauge and improper transformations.

We have established that four light paths may be unequal in length.
How does that violate causality, the speed of light or PoR ?

Causality is only violated by the transmission of information faster than
light. This has never been observed.

No such possibility was considered.


73

Perhaps bowing to experimental evidence goes against your preference
for obfuscation via random citation but TRY READING for understanding.

There is no evidence that uniform motion affects hair growth.
So I am not "going aginst experimental evidence".


The Nobel prize lecture says nothing about light clocks acting differently
than ponderable clocks, nor does it say that light exerts no pressure, nor
does it say that the Lorentz-Einstein transforms for time have no reality.

True but it does give some insight that is not expressed
in the formalism of GR. The induction A.E. mentions is
not accessable with his formalism.


Nothing you have cited make any statement that support your contentions
that time is absolute.

The descripion of the Coulomb gauge makes that case well and
QM and QED attest to its accuracy.


And when you make your extension cord 'stretchy'
signals sent down it will show the same doppler shifts as signals
transmitted through the dielectric medium of space.

But I didn't make the extension cord stretchy. It is just a
way to insist on operation in the Coulomb gauge for folks
that don't know the rules. They have heard clocks have to
slow with motion so will consider no other possibiltiy.

You have shown no conflict with the statements from
Weinberg and Fitzpatrick. You have only shown that it
was *convenient* for Einstein and didn't present a
severe conflict with his particle light.

You have the Noble committee's opinion on that.


Sue...






--
bz



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The real twin paradox.
    ... Light beams would replace thrusters if it were. ... such as light exerting pressure so your response is off target. ... I have worked with a 500 Watt CW laser. ... sense on other bodies (acceleration induction). ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The real twin paradox.
    ... Light beams would replace thrusters if it were. ... masses such as light exerting pressure so your response is off target. ... I have worked with a 500 Watt CW laser. ... You read something into the coulomb gauge that I don't. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Laser experiments offer insight into evolution of "gas giants" (Forwarded)
    ... Laser experiments offer insight into evolution of "gas giants" ... million times more pressure than the Earth's atmosphere -- one GPa ... Also, the final pressures, 16 GPa for a single shock, were significantly ... Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has a mission to ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Laser experiments offer insight into evolution of "gas giants" (Forwarded)
    ... Laser experiments offer insight into evolution of "gas giants" ... times more pressure than the Earth's atmosphere -- one GPa ... Also, the final pressures, 16 GPa for a single shock, were significantly ... Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has a mission to ...
    (sci.space.news)
  • Re: The real twin paradox.
    ... Light beams would replace thrusters if it were. ... masses such as light exerting pressure so your response is off target. ... sue-bungee- type extension cord. ... *observables*, not ~possibilities~. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)