Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber

On Jun 17, 2:42 pm, Uncle Ben <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 17, 5:18 pm, Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Jun 17, 11:57 am, "Dirk Van de moortel"

<dirkvandemoor...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dono <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

  82127efe-4dda-40e3-8e53-72a55da87...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 17, 9:49 am, rotchm <rot...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The t=0 and x'=L

Imbecile, an event is defined as a set of coordinates in the SAME
frame. Look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity#Reference_frames.2C_c...

The article says:
   "An event is an occurrence that can be *ASSIGNED* a single unique
         time and location..."
   "We *CAN* completely *SPECIFY* an event by its four space-time
         coordinates..."
   "Let's define the event *TO HAVE* space-time coordinates (t,x,y,z) in
         system S and ..."

It does *not* say:
   "An event *is* a single unique time and location..."
   "We *CAN ONLY DEFINE* an event *AS* its four space-time
         coordinates..."
   "Let's define the event *TO BE* space-time coordinates (t,x,y,z) in
         system S and ..."

So, "..., an event is NOT defined as a set of coordinates in the
same frame"

Dirk Vdm

OK,

Let's make it clearer for your benefit: an even is a point in
Minkowski space (see Rindler, second edition "Relativity-Special ,
General, and Cosmological, bottom of page 91).
As such, it is P(x,y,z and t), NOT P(x,y,z and t') where t' is the
transformed of t. Nor is it P(t,t') or P(x,x'), etc as you make it to
be. So, where did you get your very original definition of "event"?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Dono,

Draw a t,x Minkowski diagram.
Make a spot in the first quadrant.
--That represents an event.
You already have x and t axes. Now add x' and t' axes.
--I know that you know how to do that.

Now observe that you have four axes drawn,
none of them parallel to any other.

Do you think that you could locate the point
using coordinates of any two of the axes?

They aren't orthogonal axes,
but you can handle that, can't you?

Uncle Ben- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Cf. Rindler (page 91) P(x,t) is an event. The transformed of P,
P'(x',t') is also an event. But Q(x,t'), is NOT an event. Try to
figure out why.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber
    ... same frame" ... Minkowski space (see Rindler, second edition "Relativity-Special, ... Dear Dono, ... You already have x and t axes. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber
    ... same frame" ... Minkowski space (see Rindler, second edition "Relativity-Special, ... You already have x and t axes. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber
    ... same frame" ... Minkowski space (see Rindler, second edition "Relativity-Special, ... General, and Cosmological, bottom of page 91). ... You already have x and t axes. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber
    ... "An event is an occurrence that can be *ASSIGNED* a single unique ... same frame" ... Minkowski space (see Rindler, second edition "Relativity-Special, ... You already have x and t axes. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Lorentz Contraction for the even dumber
    ... same frame" ... Draw a t,x Minkowski diagram. ... You already have x and t axes. ... Draw x axis horizontal. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast