Re: Semantics of Special Relativity
- From: "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:57:24 -0800 (PST)
On Feb 14, 10:59 am, rbaul...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Question on the basic semantics of special relativity...
If a ball is travelling 100mph in one direction, and you're travelling
100mph in the other direction, it is said that the ball is travelling
"200mph relative to you."
If a light beam is projected in one direction at (approx.) 186,000mps,
and you're travelling 1000mps in the opposite direction, it is said
that the particles of light are still traveling 186,000mps relative to
you, regardless of your speed (bizarre).
No... It said light moves relative to the dielectric of
free space.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_space
http://www-ssg.sr.unh.edu/ism/what.html
It has no definite relationship to radiator
or absorber in the farfield.
http://www.sm.luth.se/~urban/master/Theory/3.html
Now, in both cases above, light is essentially matter, and the ball is
matter. Could it not be said in case 1 that the DISTANCE between the
ball and you is INCREASING by 200mph? And in case two, is not the
distance between you and the light increasing by 187,000mph?
No... light is not matter and does not propagte as
a particle.
<<Now, does not the prize to Einstein imply
that the Academy recognised the particle
nature of light? The Nobel Committee says
that Einstein had found that the energy exchange
between matter and ether occurs by atoms emitting
or absorbing a quantum of energy,hv .
As a consequence of the new concept of light quanta
(in modern terminology photons) Einstein proposed the
law that an electron emitted from a substance by
monochromatic light with the frequency has to have
a maximum energy of E=hv-p, where p is the energy needed to
remove the electron from the substance. Robert Andrews
Millikan carried out a series of measurements over a
period of 10 years, finally confirming the validity of this
law in 1916 with great accuracy. Millikan had, however,
found the idea of light quanta to be unfamiliar and strange.
The Nobel Committee avoids committing itself to the
particle concept. Light-quanta or with modern terminology,
photons, were explicitly mentioned in the reports on
which the prize decision rested only in connection with
emission and absorption processes. The Committee says
that the most important application of Einstein's photoelectric
law and also its most convincing confirmation has come from
the use Bohr made of it in his theory of atoms, which explains
a vast amount of spectroscopic data. >>
http://nobelprize.org/physics/articles/ekspong/index.html
Sue...
So the issue is not so much whether the object is moving "faster"
relative to you, but in every case, is not the distance between you
expanding at an equal rate at constant velocities, regardless of
whether or not it's a ball, light, or or any other material?
RB
.
- References:
- Semantics of Special Relativity
- From: rbaulbin
- Semantics of Special Relativity
- Prev by Date: Re: Eric Gisse has no any diploma
- Next by Date: Re: Spin
- Previous by thread: Re: Semantics of Special Relativity
- Next by thread: Re: Semantics of Special Relativity
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|