Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?

On Jul 25, 10:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 25, 3:38 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Jul 25, 8:00 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Jul 25, 1:23 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

No, I didn't decide it. I deduced it from nothing. This is the result
of their MEASUREMENTS. Stan took a ruler and measured the distance
between the poles that the yellow and green flashes came from. Tom
took a ruler and measured the distance between front brush and rear
brush.

What would you retort if I claimed that you are wrong,
because I observed that the length of the train is 800 m
in Stan's frame, and 600 m in Tom's frame?

Then you would be telling Stan and Tom that their ruler measurements
are wrong. You would be simply denying reality at that point. Keep in
mind that they didn't use any math or logic to arrive at those values.
They simply measured it, with rulers.

Yes, I could tell Stan & Tom that they are wrong.
How do you, or Stan & Tom, know that their measurements
correspond to reality, but not mine?

As I told you, the measurements made by Stan and Tom are consistent
with measurements made in equivalent experiments actually done in the
real world and actually researchable.

You seem to be under the impression that SR is based on supposition,
and logical arguments based on hypothetical situations where the
reverse of the situation could be equally supposed. That is not the
case. The strength of SR is not based on the plausibility of its
suppositions and the coherence of arguments that follow, but also on
verification with EXPERIMENT. Nothing in the way of supposition or
argument carries much water in science until someone actually runs an
experimental check that effectively asks of Nature, "Is this right? Do
you really behave this way?"

If you stick to just the suppositions and the logic and never check in
with reality, then of course it's going to seem just as easy to make
the opposite suppositions. But Nature settles the matter
*definitively*, in experiments designed to check which supposition is
actually right -- this one or that one.

PD

Of course, you could always take the approach that Henri Wilson takes:
"I don't believe in the reliability of any experiment that produces
results that are counter to my expectations of reality."
or the Ken Seto approach:
"What the experimenters didn't realize is that their assumptions
violate the principle of relativity, and the results have to be
reinterpreted according to a new, improved theory, using the same math
but with a more sensible explanation."
or the Spaceman approach:
"They did not. No experimenter ever did such. They just love their
rubber rulers. Moron. LOL."
or the Andre Michaud approach:
"I don't concern myself one whit whether experimenters agree with my
conclusions or not. I wouldn't dream of being associated with a cabal
of deluded fools."

PD

Everybody is entilted to his own theory.
The only thing I reject in SR is that it seemingly
claims that the Earth can be moving wrt to a train,
or to a muon, etc...
That's why I was happy to read that its strength
is not based on the plausibility of its suppositions
and the coherence of arguments that follow, but also
on verification with EXPERIMENT.
Hereafter is a plausible illustration of the reason
why the Earth cannot chase a train.

' TRAIN: GR & SR effects

'A train moving at v is subject to an acceleration
'a = v^2/R (1) due to the Earth's curvature
'(R is the Earth's radius)
'Hence, for the moving train, the net acceleration
'of gravity is g = g0-a (2), with g0 = GM/R^2
'To g corresponds a theoretical distance d
'from the center of the Earth,
'according to the equation g = GM/d^2
'From relations (1) and (2), one gets
'd^2 = GM*R^2 / (GM-v^2*R)
'Consequently, relative to a clock at rest,
'the ticking rate of a clock situated on the
'train will not only slow down by the SR factor
'sqrt(1-v^2/c^2), but it will also increase
'by the GR factor
'sqrt(1 + (2GM/c^2) * (1/R - 1/d))
'Compared to the SR effect, the GR effect is
'negligible for realistic train velocities on Earth.
'But for a hypothetical train moving at, for
'instance, 10000 km/h, the difference between
'the train and Earth clocks would amount
'to about 0.122 microsecond per day.

In the real world, SR and GR effects are always
mixed together.

Marcel Luttgens
.

Quantcast