Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?

On Jul 21, 7:37 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 21, 1:36 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jul 21, 3:34 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Jul 21, 4:02 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

A simple experiment shows that the train, not the ground,
is moving :
Tom used a spring scale on the ground. He put an object
on the scale, and found some weight w0.
On the train, he uses the same very precise spring scale.
If he measures w1 < w0 for the same object, he is *certain*
that the train is moving.

Why, Marcel, I'm astounded you still think it is possible to tell if
you are at a higher or lower absolute motion than in another frame.

Tell me, Marcel, in the plane flying east to west over a rotating
earth at 600 mph, what do you think the precise scales will show, and
why? And does this depend on whether it's noon or midnight? (Think
about where the plane is and what direction it must be going, relative
to the earth's motion in each case.) And does this depend on what time
of year it is? (Think about where the plane's direction will be,
relative to the solar system's motion relative to other stars.)

If I have *two* trains going by each other on *flat* tracks (not
following the curvature of the earth, but following a chord), do you
think it is possible to tell which one is going faster than the other
through space?

But trains do follow the curvature on the Earth!

Oh, dear. So Marcel, what do you think the answer is about the plane
that is flying east to west at 600 mph, hovering (at least in terms of
the sun-earth frame) in space while the earth rotates under it? Is the
plane *really* moving, and how can you tell?

And Marcel, you do realize, don't you, that we could have done this
whole exercise with Tom on one train and Stan on the other, with the
poles being on Stan's train and the brushes on Tom's train and filling
some other purpose, and the results of the simultaneity of the flashes
would have been exactly the same?

Finally, Marcel, if it wasn't clear, though virtually all reference
frames have either the effect of gravity or are falling some curved
trajectory in practical reality, it is also the case that in practical
reality many of those frames can be treated as inertial if the tidal
effects (read "non-inertial") are small enough to be ignored in the
measurement being taken. Small tidal effects are not the way to
determine which reference frame is the one that is "really" moving
(though it might provide some insight as to whether one of the frames
is in non-inertial motion).

Do you have any further comments or questions?

PD


Marcel Luttgens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
    ... velocity of light between moving objects. ... example of a moving train to do this. ... In any and all SR inertial frames, the measurement ... sync as measured in the frame of the track? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... If a weight is dropped from the top of a train car to ... In the Lorentz equations, a clock in S', the frame of reference ... that are moving inertially, relates the coordinates from one frame to ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The relativity of simultaneity
    ... which the train is moving) will reach the passenger before flash A. ... Closing velocities as perceived by the track observer ... light from different directions in the M' frame is isotropic. ... Closing velocity between two moving entities is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The velocity of light going pass a moving train.
    ... Let Lbe the length of the train while not ... When it is moving at v, ... the moving train as measured in the track frame. ... measurements, in the frame of the tracks. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?
    ... On the train, he uses the same very precise spring scale. ... that the train is moving. ... and $m$ the inertial mass. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast