Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?

On Jul 12, 4:37 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 12, 7:34 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 12, 4:31 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 12, 6:48 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Welcome on board. Looks like you already got yourself one of the more
interesting pathological cases. I hope that you are a psychiatrist,
there is a lot of "study material" :-)

Explain how inertial
motion affects the invariant mass

It doesn't, that's why is called "invariant".

Thank you.
Then its frequency will also be invariant.

Sue...



No, it won't. Frequency transforms according to T'=\gamma*T .
I know where you are tryng to go, you can't use the Newtonian equation
of motion in order to derive the period T=sqrt(k/I). Besides, in
relativity T=! sqrt(k/I).

The reason is that you can no longer start with the Newtonian
equation:
I*d^2(theta)/dt^2=-k*theta because F is not equal to
I*d^2(theta)/dt^2, it is equal to dp/dt.
You are trying to be too clever for your own good.
.

Relevant Pages