Re: Is This a Subtle but Completely Legitimate Redefinition,

Am Wed, 30 Jul 2008 05:36:04 -0700 schrieb stevendaryl3016@xxxxxxxxx
(Daryl McCullough) in g6pn7k0cvs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

The TimeLord says...

Am Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:36:33 -0700 schrieb Shubee <e.Shubee@xxxxxxxxx>
in 42be138c-a4fe-4cad-bcbc-c7ec0402e61a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx in
sci.physics.relativity:

It's not clear to me why the Lorentz transformation can't be reduced
to the Galilean transformation by resetting clocks, rescaling distance
measures and fiddling with clock rates according to the recipe on page
11 of http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf and
equations (48) to (58).

How do you answer this riddle?

Shubee

Easy. The Lorentz transformation

x' = gamma (x - v t)
y' = y
z' = z
t' = gamma (t - v x / c^2)

is not the same as the Galilean transformation

x' = x - v t
y' = y
y' = z
t' = t

Simple inspection reveals that.

What Shubee is saying is that whether you have Galilean transform or
Lorentz transform relating two frames depends on how clocks are
synchronized in those frames. However, the *same* synchronization
procedure, slow clock transport, leads to the Galilean transform if
Newtonian physics is correct and leads to the Lorentz transform if
Special Relativity is correct.

I didn't gather that from the question. I've been staring at the question
trying to see if I've missed the point somehow, but have come to believe
that he is asking exactly what he stated; if you can derive one from the
other by simple rescaling, particularly as done like the "rescaling" at
the web site. I've looked at the web site and it doesn't appear to be a
rescaling as mathematicians would define the term.

The fundamental disagreement between the Galilean and Lorentz transforms
is that Galilean transform does not depend on x. So they can only be made
to agree (as far a physics is concerned) when v=0. No dickering with
distance measures to time rates is going to make them agree as far as I
can tell. - If there is a way, someone should post it. However from just
topological considerations I don't believe there is a way.


Slow clock transport means that you synchronize distant clocks by
bringing all clocks together in one spot and setting them to the same
time. Then you slowly move the clocks to their final location.

Which would mean that you could use the Galilean transform as an
approximation to Lorentz in that case. But that's already built into
Relativity. If that is what Shubee is asking, then I think the question
is ill-stated, which I don't believe. I believe he is asking exactly what
he posted.

--
// The TimeLord says:
// Pogo 2.0 = We have met the aliens, and they are us!
.