Re: Train gedanken pitfall

On Jun 3, 10:32 am, kk <mr_kurt_kings...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
BR complained:

Einstein wrote, "In accordance with definition the two clocks
synchronize if tB-tA=t'A-tB."  There is no mention of distance
or presetting there.

I can see that I have a nut case on my hand, but I will
patiently cope.

BTW, nutcase, Wheeler worked personally with Einstein, and
Wheeler was Feynman's thesis advisor. Not only that, but
Wheeler coined the term "black hole."

Are you saying that Wheeler is a liar or a crank?

I'm saying his text "Spacetime Physics" does not promote
understanding. To believe and talk the talk is not the same thing as
understanding.

I say again that you are a nut case.

Considering the source I can live with that ;)

But, as I said, I can cope with the likes of you.

Here is some stuff straight from the hoss's mouth:

"We have not defined a common 'time' for A and B, for the
latter cannot be defined at all unless we establish by
definition that the 'time' required by light to travel
from A to B equals the 'time' it requires to travel from
B to A. Let a ray of light start at the 'A time' from A
towards B, let it at the 'B time' be reflected at B in
the direction of A, and arrive again at A at the 'A time'."

"In accordance with definition the two clocks synchronize if
        tB-tA=t'A-tB."

First of all, do you see the distance AB? As Einstein said,
this is the travel distance for the light ray.

Yes, I see the distance AB. And I think we can agree that if you use
a standard rod to measure the distance from A to B and then from B to
A you will find it to be the same distance either way. Do you agree?

Second of all,
did you see the quotes which Einstein carefully placed around
his word "time" and his phrases "A time" and "B time"? These
quotes will warn the normal (non-nut-case) reader that these
times are NOT per clocks (not measured experimentally).

I would say it is more likely because despite being in the same frame
of reference A and B do not yet share a common time. Each has his own
clock ticking away so they can assign a time to any event that happens
at their location, but they have no way of relating those events to
when things happen at other locations because their clocks have not
been synchronized. Synchronized clocks is a different concept than
recording a sequence of events at a single location so he chose to
emphasize it.

Third of all, did you not notice that Einstein at no time
performed the experiment (the one-way light speed experiment),
but merely DEFINED the one-way travel time as "AB/c"?

Which is in accordance with the second postulate. The speed of light
is the universal constant c. The speed of light is the standard. If
c is the standard it had better take AB/c for light to travel the
distance or you are doing something wrong! If you have defined a
platinum rod at a given temperature to be the standard unit of
measurement, and later measure it to be slightly more than one unit
long, do you recalibrate your measuring device or machine a bit off
the standard?

This is the same as Wheeler's version, which stated that the
distant clocks are preset to read Einstein's prechosen "time"
"x/c."

It is similar but not the same. In Einstein's version you don't need
to know or measure the distance. Just measure the round trip time for
light and set the clocks so that the calculated one way trip is half
of the round trip time. For many it is difficult to disassociate the
space coordinates of Frame D from those of Frame A. Since Einstein's
method puts more on time than distance I think it is better.

Now that I have patiently explained, wasting a lot of time,
we are back to my original post. Running in circles is fun.

Einstein simply took the given round-trip time, and divided
it by two for ALL frames, regardless of the FACT that each
frame moves differently.

Are you sure they are all moving? Might one be stationary? If so how
do you know which one?

Do you agree that all light travels at the same speed? That no ray
can overtake another traveling in the same direction? Or do you think
that a source imparts its motion on the light it emits?

As my simple experiment showed (to everyone but a nut case),
it is physically impossible for a single light ray to hit
more than one clock at one time, and this counters Einstein's
definition which makes ALL frames' distant clocks read "x/c"
baselessly and directly against the experimental evidence.

You're absolutely certain that Frame B isn't stationary and it was the
source that was moving? What is your basis for saying that Fraqme B
is moving? Your experiment shows there is relative motion between the
source and observers at rest in Frame B, but it does not prove that it
is Frame B that is moving.

BR also wrote (partly contradicting his above):

kk wrote:
The experiment proves the variance of light's one-way speed,
and this contradicts SR flatly.
It does not.  Putting the diagram you snipped back in
S--------------------------->
[?]-------Frame A---------[x/c]
----[?]-------Frame B---------[x/c]
---------[?]-------Frame C---------[x/c]
--------------[?]-------Frame D---------[x/c]
Each frame considers the flash to have started from the
stationary [?], not from the current location of the moving
source.  In each frame the distance traveled is the same,
and in each frame the preset time is the same.  All the
frames will end up with their clocks set in such a way that
the one way speed of light is measured to be c.

NOW you are agreeing with Wheeler, Einstein, and me that
the clocks ARE preset. Make up your mind if you can find it.

The above was Wheeler's method, not Einstein's. I was showing that
Wheeler's method gives the same result. That doesn't make it the same
method that Einstein used.

Also, I already said that the distances are the same in all
the frames.

You have made it quite clear that you think the light has to travel
further from its emission at S to the observer at [x/c] in the moving
frames. In your mind light is traqveling at c-v relative to [x/c].
But by agreement all the observers at rest in Frame B have set their
clocks based on light traveling at c relative to them, not S. It puts
their clocks out of sync with those set based on light traveling at c
relative to S, but that's ok. We have the LT to translate from one
set of coordinates to the other if we need to.

The TIME is the problem.

I say that it is physically impossible for light's one-way
speed to be experimentally measure as c between two clocks
that in the same frame. (Transported and/or rotated clocks
are not allowed because moving clocks run slow, thereby
invalidating the experimental results.)

You can always construct a coordinate system based on light traveling
at c relative to the stationary observers in a frame. When that
coordinate system is used to measure the speed of light relative to
the observers in that frame you better get c or you have done
something wrong. If a second frame that is moving relative to the
first constructs its coordinate system based on light traveling at c
relative to its observers, it will also measure the speed of light to
be c.

The two frames will not agree on when and where things happen, unless
they use the LT. But unless you can show why one or the other should
be considered the absolute frame we will have to allow each to build
their coordinate system as they have.

Why don't YOU show us exactly how an experiment can measure
light's one-way speed between two same-frame clocks? (not
using any rotated or transported clocks of course)

No need to. The speed of light is the standard used to check the sync
of the clocks. If the speed of light is measured as something other
than c the clocks are out of sync.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Einsteins Train Gedanken Re-visited
    ... rest in the ether frame. ... Two touching and synchroneous clocks are moved very slowly in the ... distance, and does it increase with distance or decrease? ... improper to use it to verify one way light speed isotropy. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einsteins Train Gedanken Re-visited
    ... rest in the ether frame. ... Two touching and synchroneous clocks are moved very slowly in the ... distance, and does it increase with distance or decrease? ... two clocks moving in the opposite directions will remain synchronized. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A challenge to non-SRians
    ... > All GPS clocks are E-synched in the ECI frame. ... > I count one bounce and two traversals of the distance, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: relativity of time
    ... |> required by light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires to ... |> (the distance traveled by a beam of light reflected back to the first ... | in frame RB. ... | If that is the case, then the reflection event of the signal is indeed ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: I am Trying To Learn Relativity
    ... speeds past a light source that emits a light flash when they are both next ... They both use rulers and clocks. ... frame, reguardless of what other frames measure. ... measured to travel at c in all frames. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading