Re: Is physics really a matter of belief?

From: Jim Greenfield (greenfield_7_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 11/22/04 

Date: 22 Nov 2004 14:24:12 -0800

Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message news:<%_god.444121$D%.12951@attbi_s51>...
> Sam Wormley wrote:
> > Jim Greenfield wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> The ball doesn't give a rats arse which DIRECTION it is going; it
> >> is only concerned in maintaining its energy. It has velocity reducing
> >> to zero, and then INCREASING positively.
> >>
> >
> > When you, Jim, describe the motion of the ball, you must define a
> > coordinate system.... and the motion must be with *respect* to some
> > frame of reference.
> >
> > In your example you make the vertical axis positive downward. That's
> > legitimate. You notice that the ball at first had a *negative* displacement
> > and *negative* velocity in your coordinate system.
> >
>
> See: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/mmedia/vectors/nhlp.html

To help Sam visualise:
A clock hand is turning, and we'll (you'll) nominate that as (+)
direction.
Now walk around the back, and your + direction has become opposite,
while the clock is doing exactly the same event. ie + and - must be
the same, because you have DEFINED them so.

I won't subscribe to a Nature which is subjective. Just because
someone has an opinion on what is happening in a specific event, does
NOT mean that that observer is correct. VERY often they are mistaken.

Frames of reference are human constructs whereby situations are too
complex to be understood or calculated on (3 or more moving bodies),
so a little window (FoR) is selected, and all else is ignored.
That baseball? If, according to the reality of nature in the motion of
the universe, the earth is moving at >G, then the ball still may have
constant positive (or negative) velocity at all times.

Jim G
c'=c+v

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Kepler ,Newton and orbital geometry
    ... imaging to illustrate Kepler's explanation of apparent retrograde motion, ... We're hardly limited to one frame of reference, ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Gravity Probe B-failure or special new success?
    ... with a parenthetical reference to the motion of our gyroscope rotors. ... reference corresponding to zero velocity in the aether. ... corresponds to an effect of a fixed frame - the same one identified by ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: New analysis puts dark matter back into elliptical galaxies (Forwarded)
    ... My hope is that the need for fudge factors such as "dark matter" will hasten the transition to a galactic model. ... Could dark matter play a role in the motion of Oort cloud objects? ... I wonder if there's some confusion between the motions and the frames of reference of those motions. ... For instance, solar system bodies move on heliocentric paths, because that's overwhelmingly the local centre of mass, but you're free to choose whatever frame of reference is convenient. ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Kepler ,Newton and orbital geometry
    ... effects given by Einstein's Special and General theories of relativity ... Similarly, strictly speaking, all motion is "relativistic," and once I had ... long walk from the frame of reference of an observer stationary with respect ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Nature of inertia (first law)
    ... > The moving ball has its own frame of reference - stationary with respect ... > the ball, but moving compared to the bottom of the track. ...
    (sci.physics)