Re: Is physics really a matter of belief?

From: Gregory L. Hansen (glhansen_at_steel.ucs.indiana.edu)
Date: 11/28/04 

Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:30:38 +0000 (UTC)

In article <3c4afb26.0411280153.3bb6fe4a@posting.google.com>,
Jim Greenfield <greenfield_7@hotmail.com> wrote:
>glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
>news:<co5stu$tuf$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
>> In article <3c4afb26.0411242253.3b1f459c@posting.google.com>,
>> Jim Greenfield <greenfield_7@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote in message
>> >news:<co3eu9$6ej$2@hood.uits.indiana.edu>...
>>
>> >> I'll assume you know what the Galilean transforms are. Staying Galilean,
>> >> if a car passes me heading east at 30 mph, and then I start running east
>> >> at 10 mph, the car's velocity relative to me becomes 20 mph east. Right?
>> >> I'm going in the same direction, so 30 mph - 10 mph = 20 mph. If the car
>> >> passes me heading east at 30 mph and I start running west at 10 mph, the
>> >> car's velocity relative to me is 40 mph. Right? Because 30 mph - (-10
>> >> mph) = 30 mph + 10 mph = 40 mph. Woah, there's a plus sign!
>> >
>> >And do you think that the total energy of the system can be 20 units
>> >AND 40 units, depending on which mistaken observer is watching?
>>
>> If by total you mean kinetic, and by 20 and 40 units you mean 20^2 and
>> 40^2 units, sure. Energy is not an intrinsic property of a particle, it's
>> a relationship between particles. Two different observers can observe the
>> same system and determine two different total energies, and they'll both
>> be right because they have different velocities with respect to the
>> system.
>
>So you would also claim that a particle has the same energy, whether
>it be at 10degK or 1000? If you think that YOU can nominate a
>particle's energy, by arbitrarily selecting a frame of reference in
>which it is moving or not, guess who's the crackpot?

Yes, that's what I must have meant by specifying kinetic. Since we're
interpreting each other in the stupid possible way now, I see you think
temperature is the only contribution to a system's total or kinetic
energy.

Temperature is the average center of mass kinetic energy of a group of
constituent particles. If every particle had the same speed and were
moving in the same direction the temperature would be zero. So the
temperature still depends on how the particles are related to each other,
even if not to the observer. Although a useful quantity called the
stagnation temperature does depend on the speed of the center of mass.

>>
>> >Away for a few days.
>> >Take the time to re-educate "expert" Sam W, and to renew your oaths of
>> >allegience.
>>
>> If you think relativity is wrong, that doesn't make you a crackpot. If
>> you have a theory of your own, that, in itself, doesn't make you a
>> crackpot. But you don't have to agree with a theory to understand it.
>> And you don't even understand why relativity was widely seen as a good
>> idea in the first place.
>
>It might be, were it not for the error in c=c+v ("Book of Magic" p. 1
> )
>
> Struggling to comprehend, you throw out
>> accusations of religious ferver and never for a moment suspect that people
>> who have studied the theory might know something about it that you don't.
>> That's the makings of a crackpot.
>
>A crackpot would be one of a group who admire the beautiful magical
>cloak of the emperor, when actually he is stark naked. Fortunately my
>eyes are not so defective, nor my imagination!.......even if the view
>is lacking artistic appeal.

Yeah, yeah. And the fool calls everything foolish, and

  http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html

I'll see your platitude and raise you one more.

The Lorentz transforms form a group in the mathematical sense. That means
if you find an inconsistency in them, you owe it to yourself to figure out
why you're wrong. 

-- 
"The average person, during a single day, deposits in his or her underwear 
an amount of fecal bacteria equal to the weight of a quarter of a peanut." 
-- Dr. Robert Buckman, Human Wildlife, p119.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is physics really a matter of belief?
    ... >>So you would also claim that a particle has the same energy, ... > temperature is the only contribution to a system's total or kinetic ... If every particle had the same speed and were ... The SAME passenger, sitting in the SAME train, which is travelling at ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Is physics really a matter of belief?
    ... So you would also claim that a particle has the same energy, ... > If you think relativity is wrong, that doesn't make you a crackpot. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Can someone answer these simple questions for a layman re. fusion?
    ... |> form a helium nucleus plus a neutron plus energy. ... (collisions against the electrons, heating the electrons, whose ... temperature is about 200 millions Kelvin. ... double that to get the total particle one. ...
    (sci.physics.fusion)
  • Re: relativistic thermodynamics (temperature in inertial frames)
    ... particles with speed c with finite energy) in the context of classical ... the "breaking pressure" of a gas. ... Temperature should be soluable using the ... does air resistance really increase with temperature (keeping particle density constant)? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Temperature and Pressure at atomic level?
    ... There is nothing separating kinetic energy from any other ... So there, indeed, temperature is just the average kinetic ... which the spins of the particles becomes relevant to particle energy ... If you'll say "the average kinetic energy of a particle equals (up to ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast