Re: The real twin paradox.

"Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:55ef590d-d4b7-4234-a4ce-bc41b21f6342@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On Dec 11, 6:50 pm, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
innews:415dc11d-e16d-4839-965d-5b544380e28f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On Dec 11, 2:03 pm, bz <bz+...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:58a25950-a81a-4bba-b9b0-
fc9b72b69...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

In Fact Einsten even says that time is imaginary.

He does NOT say time is imaginary!!
He replaces the time COORDINATE with an imaginary MAGNITUDE.

That makes it imaginary in the CS he consturcts.

But it is NOT imaginary, it is just represented on the i axis.

Time is mixed with space in that CS. You can't refer
to pure time in that CS. After mixture all displacements have
mixtures of time and space.

Correct. So, why do you persist on separating time from space and calling
the different rates of movement through time 'imaginary' along with the
different path lengths traveled through time and space?


Are you familiar with stereo encoding?

Probably better than you are. For example, there are several methods of
stereo encoding. One method, stereo AM broadcasting, uses independent
sidebands to broadcast stereo. Never really caught on because poor signal
to noise ratio gives stereo noise. Then there is the FM radio 'stereo'
that take Left+Right and broadcasts it over the baseband FM signal
[allowing reception, by Mono receivers, of most stereo programs. The L-R
is broadcast on a ultrasonic 'sub-carrier'[there are other things
broadcast on sub-carriers also].

The signals are
broadcast as L+R and L-R. You cannot access the Left
or Right channel unless you reverse the encoding
process. It is exactly the same just a few more
axes and forces to consider.

No. Not at ALL the same thing. Encoding and decoding sounds is not
'exactly the same' as encoding delta x, delta y, delta z and delta t onto
4 different independent axis.

However, there IS on important commonality: there is nothing imaginary
about the quantities being encoded or decoded.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_fixing
http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0204034

If your gauge is broken, get it fixed.

If your math is broken, [Einstein's ISN'T] then fix it.



Regarless of what we think he said a fully mature
branch exist to deal with what some call
*unphysical*.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauge_fixing

And nothing there says that time is unreal.

It says displacents in the Lorenz CS are not time.

displacements in space are displacements in space.
displacements in time are displacements in time.

travel from (x1,y1,z1,t1) to (x1,y1,z1,t2) by two different twins,
each taking different length trips through space time results in a
difference in the mile-o-meter and time-o-meter readings that each has on
their handy wrist mile/time-o-meter. According to Einstein Tau (the delta
t for the traveling twin) is = 1/2 v^2 t / c^2

The SAME results are obtained however you choose to derive the
transformation equations.

The final equations are to be interpreted as REAL changes in x, y, z, and
t

even if one uses retarded equations in the derivation.


When we allow a light-time for an impulse
to move from one charge to the next it is
not real. We call it the *retarded time*.

You need to realize that using retarded time to derive equations does NOT
make the derived equations retarded.

It is not real because no energy is involved.

There are lots of things used in the math, such as virtual photons,
infinite paths, and retarded potentials.

These DROP out of the equations when you get to the nitty gritty end and
finish deriving the equation, nothing is left to the imagination.


(unlike sound or lossy dielectrics where things heat up)
Recall that ~elasticity~ is a ~imagined~
component on Newtonian ether.

Yep. So what?


The Coulomb force is about 10^32 to 10^42
times greater than gravity. There is
little slack for ~stretching~ when
one charge talks to another in relativistic
descriptions.

Don't mix apples and donuts.

Concepts used in deriving equations are tools.
Sometime a parameter in an equation can be 'identified' with a physical
property. Sometime a parameter can NOT be 'identified' with a physical
property. Often it behaves 'much like something familiar' and is given a
name indicating what it is similar to.

'retarded time', 'retarded potentials', virtual photons, the cosmological
constant, etc., Are all example of math terms that 'popped out' of playing
with equations.

Some times we find a term that pops up, decide what it might represent and
then find something physical that corresponds to that. Sometimes we don't.

But none of that makes the final equations derived any less real.
They were designed to allow us to predict things that really happen.

If we do things right, they work.

The Lorentz-Einstein transform for time seems to work.

.....snip e=mcc stuff


In his 1920 paper the tranformation is trigonometric
so what is *unphysical* can be become physical

No. What is physical can be expresses through geometry or trigonometry
or by using complex number or by using tensor.



An alien lands his saucer on the passenger seat of
your 60km/hr cabriolet. He has never seen the instruments
on an automobile but notices two of the instruments seem
to be moving in sync. If you never change speed,
can he distinguish the clock from the odometer?

If he can read, he probably can. Otherwise he won't know an 'S' from a
hole in the ground.

If the alien hazzards a guess and marks "Time"
on one instrument and marks "Space" on the other
instrument, what kind of calculations go
awry if his guess is wrong?

If the alien discovers he has mismarked the
instruments for time and space are his notes
and calculations worthless? Of course not.
There are regular transformations that will
straighten it all out.

Yep


It is no different when we substitute the
speed of light for 60km/hr.

Tau = 1/2 v^2 t/c^2

It DOES make a difference.

None of those ways of expressing the relationship between time and
space make time unreal.

You can wait 'till hell freezes over. The distance
between milk in the fridge and your favorite
TV chair is not going to change.

But the distance your alien measures as he zips through the house at .9 c
will be different than the one I measured before he wrecked the house.

...even if Uri Geller is helping you watch the clock. :o)

If the CS assumes motion, and the motion isn't real
then the CS is not real.

The motion IS real, as best we can tell.

Sue, if what you were saying were true, it isn't just CHANGES in time
that would be imaginary, ALL time would be imaginary.
There would be no such 'thing' as time.
Time would have no effect on anything.

That is what we are saying.

"Time alone* HAS no effect on anything" !!!

And "space alone" has nothing to effect.

In our universe, neither time nor space nor mass exist in isolation.
They all seem to be interdependent and effect each other.

<< invariance with respect to time translation
gives the well known law of conservation of energy >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether's_theorem

Yep. and the equation is valid within a certain realm.
It 'kinda' breaks down at small distances and at large velocities.
But if you pick a large enough system, the mass<>energy sum is constant.


If your speed and force is limited and you apply
all you can muster to the bumper of an automobile,
is there any doubt in your mind about the spatial
and temporal displacements

I bet my life on it every day when I get in my car.
I accept the provisional laws of physics until they need to be revised.

that will result
if the experiment is conducted:

1. anywhere in this universe?

@. with motion relative to any other gravitationally
insignificant object?



This is because it isn't just changes in time that are plotted on the i
axes [in that particular representation], but ALL time values.

Einstein used imaginary time just as Heaviside did.

He did NOT intend for anyone to imagine that time was 'imaginary'.

Heaviside was rigourous in his application.
Einstein was not{

<< In general relativity, on the other hand, it
has no meaning to speak of a definite localization
of energy. One may define a quantity which is
divergence free analogous to the energy-momentum
density tensor of special relativity, but it is
gauge dependent: i.e., it is not covariant under
general coordinate transformations. Consequently
the fact that it is divergence free does not yield
a meaningful law of local energy conservation. Thus
one has, as Hilbert saw it, in such theories
`improper energy theorems.'
http://www.physics.ucla.edu/~cwp/articles/noether.asg/noether.html

So don't even suggest that I should ignore the math
errors and accept on faith the notion of free-time
or free-energy from a theory that can't square all
four corners and can't claim experiments removed from
gravitating bodies.

I am not proposing you accept free-time or free-energy.
The piper must be paid.

That rapid, long trip through space-time exacts a cost that YOU keep
ignoring. YOU are the one wanting a free pass.
You are the one imagining that the clock in the traveling ship STAYS IN
SYNC with the clock at home, despite all examples via Doppler shift etc.,
that CONSISTENT with Lorentz transforms, show that the clocks do NOT stay
in sync. You are the one that thinks GPS satellite clocks would stay in
sync if it were not for the difference in G forces.


You are reading from H.G. Wells famous novel, not
rigourous mathematical derivations.

See the REAL application of IMAGINARY time in equation 511
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node50.html

[quote]
In Coulomb's law and the Biot-Savart law, it is not entirely obvious that
the electric and magnetic fields have a real existence. After all, the
only measurable quantities are the forces acting between charges and
currents. We can describe the force acting on a given charge or current,
due to the other charges and currents in the Universe, in terms of the
local electric and magnetic fields, but we have no way of knowing whether
these fields persist when the charge or current is not present (i.e., we
could argue that electric and magnetic fields are just a convenient way of
calculating forces, but, in reality, the forces are transmitted directly
between charges and currents by some form of magic). However, it is
patently obvious that electric and magnetic fields have a real existence
in the time-dependent theory. [unquote]

TIME DEPENDENT THEORY. Time is clearly not imaginary.

[quote]
The electric field clearly transmits energy and momentum between the two
charges. Anything which possesses energy and momentum is ``real'' in a
physical sense. Later on in this course, we shall demonstrate that
electric and magnetic fields conserve energy and momentum. [unquote]

<< in reality there is not the least incompatibility
between the principle of relativity and the law of
propagation of light >> --A. Einstein
http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html

That does not mean he rejected MMX or
accepted Newton's ether.

Of course not. He also never said that the time transforms were broken.

Your clocks are slowed by Newton's ether.

Sez YOU. No one else.

Einstein's clocks are slowed by Doppler.

Einstein showed ALL clocks slow consistent with Doppler.

Which do we have evidence of?

We have evidence of slowing. Ascribe the cause as you will, the slowing is
consistent with Einstein's predictions.

Why you choose to ascribe the cause to imaginary daemons, I do not
understand.





--
bz

please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an
infinite set.

bz+spr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
.

Relevant Pages

  • Tell Aneyd its italian warming in touch with a button.
    ... You won't pack me picturing in charge of your right background. ... She can wound once, assure far, then wave in search of the influence ... There, go crash a imagination! ... Are you pure, I mean, valuing amid short staircases? ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Why is there something, not nothing?
    ... imagination, we aren't motivated to find new ways of testing. ... energy" cultists who demand to know why I know "free energy" will ... You are mixing up two things: a) the fact that scientific knowledge is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Temperature Equivalent of Time
    ... Time is as imaginary as the square root of minus one. ... Money is the energy of imagination divided among the knowledgeable. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Music An Effective Remedy For Chronic Pain
    ... (by itself is just to boring). ... I'm more refreshed and relatively pain free. ... It has nothing to do with music except in the imagination. ... music (energy) and the imagination work together. ...
    (misc.health.alternative)
  • Re: On the horns of a dilemma
    ... The flow of energy through your body. ... What evidence is there that such blockages or energy flows exist? ... If I spent money on a figment of my imagination, it was money well spent, since I felt enormously better afterwards than I did before the session. ...
    (soc.singles.moderated)