Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation
From: jem (xxx_at_xxx.xxx)
Date: 01/09/05
- Next message: jem: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Previous message: Androcles: "Re: Androcles and Draper resume Einstein 1905"
- In reply to: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Reply: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Reply: Bill Hobba: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 08:29:40 -0500
Bilge wrote:
> jem:
>
> >Remember this proposed definition? An inertial reference frame is a
> >reference frame in which all stationary standard clocks tick at the same
> >rate.
>
> Yes, I remember it. It's still circular and doesn't explain what
> ``ticks at the same rate'' means.
"Ticks at the same rate" means the number of ticks recorded on each
clock is equal over every time interval. The comparison between any 2
clocks is accomplished by sending signals from one to the other and
comparing the rate of the received signal with the tick rate of the
clock at the reception point. This comparison can be done without
synchronizing the clocks (although synchronizing them at the onset would
make an actual comparison easier).
Where do you see circularity?
- Next message: jem: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Previous message: Androcles: "Re: Androcles and Draper resume Einstein 1905"
- In reply to: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Next in thread: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Reply: Bilge: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Reply: Bill Hobba: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|