Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity



Russell wrote:

On Sep 28, 9:08 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 28, 11:27 am, Russell <rblacka...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


On Sep 28, 9:43 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

You have a fundamental misunderstanding here. The light
beams meet at a fixed event, *one* event in spacetime.
No matter who is watching this happen, all observers must
agree it is the same event, otherwise you have an observer
dependent reality (which you tell me you don't want--good!).
The problem with what you say is that the S and S' origins
cannot both be at that event, since everyone agrees they are
at *different* places when the beams meet. It makes no
difference what you think the nature of light is, the
contradiction remains.

Well, scientists see a contradiction here. I do not see one. If a
bell at the origin of S is to ring when light from both ends of the
train reaches it, then the bell rings when the origin of S' is a
distance of vt from the origin of S.


Fine, so I gather now that you are *not* claiming that a
similar bell on the train (at origin S') would ring, since it
is as you say, distance vt from where the meeting occurs.
Pardon my misunderstanding of what you wrote.

The problem with that is, in the train frame, you are claiming
that the lightning strikes front and back of the train at the
same time, and moreover that the light of these flashes travels
at velocity -c and c, respectively, in this frame; and yet from
the above you say these beams do not meet at origin of S'. Sorry,
that doesn't work out.


Now at lower velocities, what this interpretation of the Galilean
transformation equations is saying is almost mathematically identical
to what the Lorentz equations say. For instance, at the velocity of
the planet Mercury, 30 miles per second, times and distances agree to
several decimal places.
So regardless of what scientists may think, the equations are good
enough for a welder. What is lacking so far are irrefutable reasons
why the equations are wrong.


They are wrong for high velocities. If all you care about
is low velocities, then it's fine to keep using the easier
transform of course. That's what physicists themselves do
when making their calculations. But if you are looking for
a general law that will cover all cases, Galilean transform
won't do.

For instance, your objection that light

cannot be meeting at two different places appears to me to be overcome
by the fact that the event triggered by meeting of light at the origin
of S is shown in S' by the fact that the event occurs when the origin
of S' is a distance of vt from the origin of S'. This is the only
objection to the equations that has been given. It does not appear to
hold up to me.


My point is you are making incompatible claims. If you agree
with me on one of them (meeting point at x=0 in S and not at
x'=0 in S') and disagree with me on the other (simultaneity of
the flashes in S') then there is a problem, and one of us is
wrong. (And I know who. ;-) You can't have it both ways.

winn has no clue about any of this. He just "knows" what he thinks
is right. He has been shown his errors many times but he just
keeps repeating the same crap over and over. He is just trolling.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity
    ... beams meet at a fixed event, ... similar bell on the train would ring, ... distance vt from where the meeting occurs. ... at velocity -c and c, respectively, in this frame; ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Constructive interference in radiowave propagation
    ... Distance to the observation point ... The "passing waves" then go on to form nulls in the infinite distance. ... There will most definitely be interference in the region of intersection, but the beams will continue through unchanged. ... The fact that the beams interfere means that the sum of the fields shows the characteristic constructive and destructive behavior. ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.antenna)
  • Re: Wang / Sagnac Devices
    ... There are lots of angles, alpha and -alpha, made by the beams ... when the second other arrives. ... now at the 11 o'clock position in the rotating frame. ... I use velocity to denote velocity of the objects with respect to their ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Contraction has been abolished by Special Relativity
    ... beams meet at a fixed event, ... No matter who is watching this happen, all observers must ... distance vt from where the meeting occurs. ... I don't believe in the length contraction. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Four mirror Sagnac
    ... In this animation of a four mirror Sagnac ring the phase is shown. ... beam-splitter is reached and the two beams combined, still in phase, one ... departs with velocity c+v and the other with velocity c-v. ... I mean a crime committed by a scientist against fellow scientists and ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)