Re: ABOUT THE GALILEI PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY

On Nov 10, 4:00�pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 10, 4:56�pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Nov 10, 3:14 pm, "Paul B. Andersen"

<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Strich.9 skrev:

On Nov 10, 3:02 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 10, 1:56 pm, "Strich.9" <strich.9...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 10, 2:14 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 10, 12:37 pm, "Strich.9" <strich.9...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 10, 12:11 pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
strich.9...@xxxxxxxxx a crit :
On Nov 9, 12:02 pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
No, Lorentz equations DO NOT show that the two clocks are running > at different rates.
Of all the stupidity, of course they do. The LTE is the conversion
factor from one clock rate to another.
No stritch, the LTE are the conversion equations from the coordinates
of events in a frame to coordinates in another frame.
Talking about clock changing rates is a very misleading way to talk
about SR. See how Robert Winn, Androcles, Seto, Wilson, etc. are
confused because they once meet such popular science abstract of SR.
Time dilation = clock slowing.
No, not exactly. In comic books it is. Is that what you're reading?
Try this comic book:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
You mean the one that says this?:
"Time dilation is the phenomenon whereby an observer finds that
another's clock, which is physically identical to their own, is
ticking at a slower rate as measured by their own clock. This is often
interpreted as time "slowing down" for the other clock, but that is
only true in the context of the observer's frame of reference. Locally
(i.e., from the perspective of any observer within the same frame of
reference, without reference to another frame of reference), time
always passes at the same rate."

I realize that three sentences in a row is a bit too much information
for someone with an IQ of 200, and that it's better to boil it down to
something that would fit in a comic book speech bubble.

And yes, by the way, Wikipedia is not a sound reference for relativity
in general. Would you like some pointers to some better material?

PD-

Maybe you did not read you own cut and paste: "Time dilation is the
phenomenon whereby an observer finds that another's clock ... is
ticking at a slower rate as measured by their own clock".

Let me digest that further for you: "Time dilation ... another
clock ... slower rate".

And this final digest: "Time dilation = slower rate". (Which is what
I originally said.)

And this final conclusion: PD = super low IQ

So when a person with a super-high IQ read this statement:
"Time dilation is the phenomenon whereby an observer finds that
another's clock, which is physically identical to their own, is
ticking at a slower rate as measured by their own clock. This is often
interpreted as time "slowing down" for the other clock, but that is
only true in the context of the observer's frame of reference. Locally
(i.e., from the perspective of any observer within the same frame of
reference, without reference to another frame of reference), time
always passes at the same rate."

all he can digest is:
"Time dilation = slower rate"

And since:
"Locally(i.e., from the perspective of any observer within the same
frame of reference, without reference to another frame of reference),
time always passes at the same rate."

the person with the super high IQ notices that his clock doesn't run
at a slower rate, and concludes that "Time dilation doesn't exist".

Indigestion?

--
Paul

Well, Paul, the problem with that is that scientists say they have
orbited a clock in a sattelite and compared time on that clock with an
identical clock on earth, and the clock in the sattelite showed less
time. �They even recovered a clock from a sattelite and took it to
where the identical clock on earth was, and it showed less time. �If
it was just a question of one observer seeing another clock running
slower and the other observer seeing the first observer's clock
running slower, why does one clock show less time?
Robert B. Winn

Because they are not in two inertial frames, Robert.

This applies to two inertial frames:
"If it was just a question of one observer seeing another clock
running slower and the other observer seeing the first observer's
clock running slower..."

This applies to cases where at least one of the frames is not inertial
the whole way:
�"...does one clock show less time."

It might help if you knew a little about special relativity and what
it says, Bobby.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, what is it that you think I do not know about special
relativity, PD?
Robert B. Winn
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Post 2. Facts and Rules for SR Transforms!
    ... > A change in frame is an act by man, ... a change in frame indicates that the observer is moving at a ... > the same clock time. ... > tree that was present, and this real living tree was ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Conflicting truths in time dilation aka time dilation debunking 101..
    ... No one says that one clock ticks at two ... a Frame of Reference isn't a story. ... usually selected to coincide with an observer ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Is the speed of light really constant ?
    ... > seen in A' and B's frame of reference.Since this would specify the ... > and B as well,it therefore it must also be the time when the light pulse ... > observer B ... >> M' bounces a signal off the clock at A' and times its return. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)