Re: Time dilation requires physical contraction
- From: Eric Gisse <jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:43:14 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 30, 5:58 pm, Peri of Pera <rie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Time dilation requires physical contraction
No, it doesn't.
SR has modified the early definition of contraction. Today it denies
that objects in motion contract physically. However, it retains the
Lorentz contraction formula and uses it to measure 'perceived'
contraction. Originally, SR stood on two legs, physical contraction
and time dilation. One leg has been amputated and SR hobbles
illogically through a minefield of irrationality.
Only to someone who can't tell the difference between a projection
effect and something that happens locally to the object. Does an
object PHYSICALLY get smaller if I rotate it, or does it just appear
to be smaller? Same difference, except for your relativity myopia.
What is the problem? Relativity postulates time dilation, a slowing of
time proportional to an increase of speed. What physical mechanism
translates speed into slower time? There is no such mechanism. Time
dilation is purely caused by the constancy of light rule of
relativity. Time dilation is a function and consequence of physical
contraction. It has no foundation in anything else. If SR adjusts
(dilates) time following an increase in speed and there is no
corresponding physical contraction, the constancy of the speed of
light is compromised. Both metre and second of a moving body must be
affected physically to the same degree. If not, the speed of light is
anisotropic.
You proclaim a lot for someone who has spent years and years arguing
about what you don't understand.
Peter Riedt
.
- References:
- Time dilation requires physical contraction
- From: Peri of Pera
- Time dilation requires physical contraction
- Prev by Date: Re: The farce of relativity of simultaneity
- Next by Date: Re: The farce of relativity of simultaneity
- Previous by thread: Time dilation requires physical contraction
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
