Re: Circular motion in SR

On Mar 25, 6:13 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 25, 12:20 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 24, 11:42�am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mar 24, 1:09�pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

�If time is measured according to
transitions of cesium isotope molecules, then local physical processes
remain the same. � �It seems to me that you have to decide which you
are going to want to do.

Exactly. The decision has been made by consensus, as all standards are
done.

Oh, I didn't know it was by concensus.  You mean the way people once
thought the sun revolved around the earth.  Well, if it is by
concensus, then we have to abide by it.

A standard is arrived at differently than a physical law, you'll note.
Or perhaps you didn't note.

 Still, a few questions tend
to come to mind.  Your definition of time is an arbitrary value of
transitions of a cesium isotope molecule at specific conditions of
altitude, temperature, and pressure.  Change the altitude,
temperature, or pressure, and the cesium isotope molecule changes its
rate of transitions anyway.

I don't know where you got that idea.

Why would they say standard temperature and pressure if it did not
matter? That was all I was going by. So you are saying that a cesium
isotope molecule on Mercury would have the same rate of transitions as
one on earth?

 So with regard to these experiments run
by scientists, do they adjust their results according to the altitude,
temperature, and pressure that exist where the experiment is run?  

No, nor do they have to. All of this information is openly available
on the web, because the standards organization is a public group.
Please refrain from guessing and do some homework instead.

Well, my homework was done on college graduates. What you are saying
is that scientists are like lawyers because they have been to
college. I already know what lawyers are like. They say, You are a
fool to go into court without a lawyer. It does not bother me. Any
time I go to court, I just say, I want a trial by jury.

To
be honest, the more I think about scientists, the more I am
disinclined to believe tham.

Then don't try to be one, by posting on a scientific newsgroup with
your notions of scientific ideas.

Science is the same to people who have not been to college as it is to
people who have been there. You are like the lawyers in court who go
into super-punishment mode whenever I ask for trial by jury. They are
going to teach me a lesson. As soon as they find out I know how to
appeal a case, they cannot get me out of their courtroom fast enough.
Scientists impress me about as much as lawyers do. This one guy
Eric Gisse
spent every post telling me how much school he had taken. So then I
posted the Galilean transformation equations and referred to S and S',
and he wanted to know over and over what S' was doing relative to S.
I guess he was just too lazy to read the Galilean transformation
equations.





I believe that there
may be other factors which also affect local physical processes. �What
I cannot understand is the position of scientists. �Scientific time is
the only measurement of time allowed. �OK, so what about your twin
theory? �How do they ever get back together according to scientific
time?
If they do, then obviously, there is some measurement of time that
includes the separation of the twins and their reuniting, which could
be calculated in either frame of reference.

No, sir. There is only frame-dependent time. There is no single time
measurement that both both twins would agree on. (You also mention
"either frame of reference" as though there were two. There are not
two. There are at least three.

Right. �If you can't answer something, try to make it more
complicated. �Really there are at least 7,238. �You say there is only
frame-dependent time, but anyone can determine for themselves that the
same event can be observed from two different frames of reference and
used to measure time in both frames of reference, just as the Galilean
transformation equations show.

OK, so do the Lorentz transformations. The problem is that the
Galilean transformations predict that the time elapsed will be the
same for all frames. The Lorentz transformations say that the time
elapsed will be different for all frames. The Lorentz transformations
agree with measurement and the Galilean ones don't, with the exception
being low-speed cases where the measurement sensitivity isn't high
enough to detect the incorrectness of the Galilean ones.

Well, n' in my equations as calculated from Galilean transformation
equation distances shows that for every frame of reference, there will
be a different rate of transitions of cesium isotope molecules. �So
the elapsed time as measured by cesium clocks in all frames will be
different.

Well, interestingly enough, by your method, the physical phenomenon
will take the same number of oscillations of the radiation from the
transition of the cesium isotope, but it will take a different number
of seconds, because for you the number of seconds per oscillations of
the radiation from the transition of the cesium isotope has to depend
on the speed of the reference frame compared to the sun.

No, not speed, velocity.  And it does not have to be the sun.  I just
used the sun as an example of a common measurement of time.

My comment stands, regardless of which distant standard is used.

Well, my equation stands, t'=t. There is no distance contraction.


 t'=t
means that S is a preferred frame of reference because S' is moving
relative to S.  But if you measure the speed of light in S' with a
clock in S', the speed of light is c because a photon is traveling at
c in S' as measured by a clock in S'.  As measured by t'=t, it would
not be traveling at c.

But it's not even as clean as that, because a laboratory that is
*accelerating* will have its speed relative to the sun changing
continually, and so by your prescription, the number of seconds per
cesium isotope transition radiation oscillation will also change
continually, and you'd have to track that change continually to even
measure how many seconds a chemical reaction takes or how long it
takes for a sample of americium to decay to half-activity or how long
it takes for hair to turn grey.

Well, no.  You just use a clock in the laboratory

Whose rate is *also* different compared to the rotation of the sun.

The rate of any clock is different than the rate of rotation of the
sun. I would challenge you to find any clock that has been made that
has the same rate of rotation as the sun.

to do that because
scientists say it has been determined by experiment that light travels
at a rate of c relative to a clock in the laboratory.

That's correct. But the rate of the clock is different than that of
the rotation of the sun, depending on the velocity of that clock
relative to the sun.

Yes, I calculate that rate to be n'=t(1-v/c), where t is a clock that
is not moving relative to the sun.

We just use the equation t'=t to keep distances straight.  A distance
in S' is the same as a distance in S.
We can calculate the time of a clock in the laboratory from the
information in the Galilean transformation equations.

Why calculate it when you have a local clock with which to *measure*
it? If you *calculate* it using the Galilean transforms, you find the
rate of the local clock doesn't agree, the rate of oscillations of the
transition of cesium isotopes doesn't agree, the rate of radioactive
decay doesn't agree, the rate of bacterial growth doesn't agree, the
rate of hair going gray doesn't agree. If you use the local clock,
these disagreements all disappear. The only thing that is different is
that the local clock doesn't agree with the sun's rotations when it
has a velocity relative to the sun.

Well, someone at the local clock might want to know how a second of
his time compared to a second as measured by t'=t, a clock not moving
relative to the sun. Or someone at the t'=t clock might want to know
how fast the transitions of a cesium isotope molecule are in S'. Of
course, scientists already know, but other people might be
interested.



Well, it does to me if I do not have to imagine a distance contraction
the way scientists require.

Why is that a problem?

Well, for one thing, no distance contraction exists. It is like going
into court and asking for trial by jury because the Constitution
guarantees the right to trial by jury in all criminal prosecutions,
and the judge and all lawyers say, You cannot have a trial by jury in
this criminal case.
So what does that mean, my criminal prosecution is not included in all
criminal prosecutions? The more people have been to college, the more
untruthful they are.





�The people traveling in
space shuttles and airplanes would have to do more mathematics than
people on the ground, which might seem unfair to them.

then t'=t, just as the Galilean transformation equations
show. �The difference in clock rates will not affect how many times
the twin leaves and returns. �But you would have to decide which clock
has the more meaningful time in describing what took place.

No, you don't. You don't have to say, "Well, we have to choose one to
be more correct and the other less correct." Likewise, when I tell you
that your speed right now is either zero or 850 mph, depending on
whether you are looking at a frame tied to the earth or one that isn't- Hide quoted text -

Robert B. Winn
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Circular motion in SR
    ... transitions of cesium isotope molecules, ... the only measurement of time allowed. ... c in S' as measured by a clock in S'. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Traffic Light with counter
    ... outline the transitions you need qualified with counter. ... PORT(CLOCK: IN STD_LOGIC; ... ELSIF THEN ... the transitions of the state machine and taking a count value relevant ...
    (comp.arch.fpga)
  • Re: Stupid Newby Question: VHDL/CPLD Shift Register Reset Problem
    ... I submitted a WebCase to Xilinx describing my problem and worked with ... clock and data lines looked clean on the scope. ... You really need to be looking with a bandwidth of at ... sorts of overshoots, undershoots and multiple transitions. ...
    (comp.lang.vhdl)
  • Re: VCR... Help PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!
    ... I have an Onan generator that was factory new (it came in the MH when I ... the fast running clock problem has disappeared for the most part... ... Without knowing -which- Onan genset you have, ... see two zero-crossing transitions instead of one for either or both of these ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)