Re: Three alternatives to explain the MMX null result


"Peter Riedt" <riedt1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:01605ef0-b863-492a-bde0-eb070f2b6c73@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 13, 3:10 pm, "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
"Peter Riedt" <rie...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:717d0c1d-de4d-48ea-9078-3c1fd2613285@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sep 13, 2:38 am, "harry" <harald.vanlintelButNotT...@xxxxxxx>
wrote:





> "Uncle Ben" <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

>news:16f67e99-0ec8-48ff-a979-b6f6651b69e3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Sep 9, 10:54 pm, The TimeLord <math-n-physics-...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> ......

> > The first one works, except that there is a different explanation
> > from Fitzgerald's that Einstein proposed: it's not the atoms (and
> > thus the arms themselves) that change, but just the perception
> > that is changing, due to the fact that observers moving with respect
> > to one another don't agree on what is simultaneous.

> Einstein proposed in 1905 that length contraction is "physical". That
> doesn't sound compatible with the above assertion that he proposed that > it
> is 'just perception'.

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

> : I thought that we had agreed that the discussion of the Spaceship
> : "Paradox" shows that the contraction is not just perception but
> : reality: the string breaks!

> Hi Uncle,

> Quite nearly so, for it was even the purpose of Bell's illustration > (only
> paradoxical for those who deny it)! But note that the fact that the > string
> breaks can be simplistically explained by claiming that from the point > of
> view of a co-moving frame at the time that the string breaks, the
> spaceships
> departed at different times (for a correct calculation length > contraction
> must be accounted for but its value is frame dependent).
> There are other, simpler ways to demonstrate that during acceleration > not
> just perception changes. For example, the fact that after a change in
> speed
> distant clocks must be resynchronized (because light propagation times > are
> different than before!) clearly demonstrates that a physical change
> occurred
> as a result of a change in speed.

> Regards,
> Harald

: Harald,
: have you ever been on a spaceship attached to another one by a string
: or are you only playing mind games masquerading as physical reality?

: Peter Riedt

Haha, I have never been on a spaceship and happily that is not needed: the
earth, and even better the earth together with satellites serves rather well
for such experiments (and no, I have not done them personally - you
perhaps?).- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

: Harry,
: relativity is nothing more than speculation using the Lorentz
: contraction and time dilation conjectures. It is already admitted that
: these effects are only perceived but not real. However, when it suits
: them, relativity boffins apply a double standard and assert that the
: effects are real e.g. twin paradox, clocks, pole in barn, muons etc.

: Peter Riedt

That's because most people know how to apply SRT but cannot understand how it works - thus such erroenous ideas that physical effects are "only perceived". However, most people rightly admit that it does work. I'm past all that; the next challenge is QM.
Harald

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Three alternatives to explain the MMX null result
    ... > thus the arms themselves) that change, but just the perception ... Einstein proposed in 1905 that length contraction is "physical". ... I thought that we had agreed that the discussion of the Spaceship ... view of a co-moving frame at the time that the string breaks, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Three alternatives to explain the MMX null result
    ... thus the arms themselves) that change, but just the perception ... Einstein proposed in 1905 that length contraction is "physical". ... I thought that we had agreed that the discussion of the Spaceship ... view of a co-moving frame at the time that the string breaks, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Travel faster than light
    ... If one wants to travel 1000 light-years with respect to ... Then the distance w.r.t. the spaceship will be less than ... >> times the rest energy of the spaceship. ... If you get length increase instead of length contraction, then you are not using the LT correctly. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Time dilation requires physical contraction
    ... If there is no physical contraction, ... will cover the full 100m length of the spaceship from emitter to ... the frame of the spaceship, I agree but then neither does time ... also understand that contraction is 'perceived' by an observer. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Time dilation requires physical contraction
    ... If there is no physical contraction, ... will cover the full 100m length of the spaceship from emitter to ... the frame of the spaceship, I agree but then neither does time ... also understand that contraction is 'perceived' by an observer. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)