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: RP: "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"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2005 09:26:58 -0500
Bilge wrote:
> jem:
> >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?
>
> See the posts from the last time you made that suggestion.
>
Perhaps it's you who should see the old posts. No circularity was
demonstrated there.
- Next message: jem: "Re: Lorentz transformations - a derivation"
- Previous message: RP: "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"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|