Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity.
From: jem (xxx_at_xxx.xxx)
Date: 09/30/04
- Next message: Dave Monroe: "Re: CLOUD WATCHERS"
- Previous message: David Thomson: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- Maybe in reply to: Bob Cain: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Next in thread: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Reply: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:06:44 -0400
Eugene Stefanovich wrote:
>>
> After giving some thought to your alleged problem I conclude that it
> should be impossible
> to create a device which never explodes via time evolution and does
> explode via "boost evolution". If the device never explodes via time
> evolution, this means that the subspace of states corresponding to
> the unexploded device is invariant with respect to the time evolution
> operator exp(iHt). Then, in order to preserve commutation relations
> of the Poincare Lie algebra, this subspace must be also invariant
> with respect to the boosts exp(-iK theta). However, if there is
> a chance of explosion via time evolution, there also should be
> a chance of explosion via boost. The same commutationn relations
> dictate that. This is all explained in subsection 13.2.1 if you
> substitute words "unstable particle" and "decay" there with words
> "explosive device" and "explosion".
First off, this wasn't "my problem", alleged or otherwise - you're the
one who claimed that a moving observer might see an explosion that a
stationary observer wouldn't. Now it seems you've reconsidered and
believe that situation isn't possible. Fine, then go back to the
"alleged" problem I did raise concerning 2 equal length rods that
are viewed by moving observers to contract differently.
Recall that I had asked what happens if the rods are lightly glued
together along their lengths (e.g. a drop of Elmer's on each end of 20
meter rods). Clearly if the glue bonds break for moving observers
you're back to the same situation as the explosion with 2 different
outcomes to explain, so you suggested the rods might bend in the moving
frame. Of course that would have to occur regardless of the strength of
the bond or stiffness of the rods, and how plausible is that? But also
consider that trip wires could be positioned around the rods which would
trigger a signal if touched (i.e. by a bending rod). How would a
stationary observer explain a signal caused by passing onlookers?
- Next message: Dave Monroe: "Re: CLOUD WATCHERS"
- Previous message: David Thomson: "Re: Aether is the empty space in which the Universe sits"
- Maybe in reply to: Bob Cain: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Next in thread: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Reply: Eugene Stefanovich: "Re: Download a new book on quantum mechanics and relativity."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
