Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: "Whoever" <noone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:50:31 +1000
"Bruce Richmond" <bsr3997@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:0b0daff6-d28f-4f2c-97fd-202b1790ee93@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip distractions]
Ok .. now please address the points you made that were WRONG .. you've played the distraction game long enough
In the context of at the time of setting up two remote clocks that are stationary and apart and in sync wrt an inertial (lab) frame (in order to measure OWLS)
BRUCE> BTW, your sync by slow transport assumes that moving the clock does
not affect its setting.
That is incorrect .. it make no such assumption. Please demonstrate why such an assumption must be made.
BRUCE> It is generally accepted that SR agrees with that assumption.
That is incorrect .. it does not. Please demonstrate where it is generally agreed that motion has no effect on clocks in SR. SR says that there will be a small difference if the speed of transport is relatively slow, and larger when faster
BRUCE> but I can show otherwise. Put the clock on a moving
train Next to the clock at A' and sync it with that clock. Slowly
transport it along the train and place it next to the clock at B'.
According to SR the transported clock must now be in sync with the
clock at B'.
That is incorrect .. SR does not say that. Please show the SR formula that says they must be in sync.
BRUCE>From the tracks we see that the clock at B' is out of
sync with the clock at A', so the setting of the transported clock had
to change as it was transported to be in sync at its new location.
Of course it does .. as viewed from the track .. and its quite a noticeable change due to the high velocity of the clock motion in the track frame (assuming a train travelling relatively fast). So this result would have no bearing on slow clock transport, the point you were trying to disprove
BRUCE> We are not talking about time dialation here. Transport the clock back to A' and the setting reverts back so that it is in sync with the clock at A'.
That is incorrect .. see the Twins paradox.
I also later said, in the same context of setting up two remote clocks so that they are in sync in a given inertial frame (not the clocks in train example) .. that SR says that moving a clock DOES affect its setting though. Even though in its own frame, where it is not moving, it ticks as it should. The trick is to move the two clocks in opposite directions at the same speed over the same distance and then stop them at the same time.
BRUCE> Nope.
That is incorrect .. please show why and how such a scenario would result in the two clocks being out of sync for the purpose of the experiment (ie in the inertial frame in which we described there speed as the same but opposite directions)
Now .. please .. rather then make up new scenarios with clocks and trains, address each of the incorrect statement you made.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- References:
- Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Uncle Ben
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Whoever
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Whoever
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Whoever
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Dono.
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Dono.
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Dono.
- Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Train gedanken pitfall
- Prev by Date: Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- Next by Date: Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- Previous by thread: Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- Next by thread: Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|