Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:
From: PD (pdraper_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 02/07/05
- Next message: Angelo: "Re: Isotope decay chains"
- Previous message: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- In reply to: kenseto: "Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Next in thread: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Reply: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 7 Feb 2005 06:36:04 -0800
kenseto wrote:
> Some Contradictory Claims in SR:
>
> SR says:
> 1. The speed of light is a universal constant.
> The speed of light is measured to be (299,792,458m/1 clock second) in
all
> inertial frames. This suggests that a clock second is an interval of
> universal time.
It suggests no such thing. The number you quoted is a conversion factor
and NOTHING MORE. There is no physical implication, any more than 2.54
cm/in would declare that an inch is an interval of universal distance.
PD
> 2. In the twin paradox scenario a clock second in the traveling
twin's clock
> is compared directly to a clock second in the stay at home clock.
Again this
> suggests that a clock second is an interval of universal time.
>
> SR also says:
> A clock second in A's frame does not correspond to a clock second in
B's
> frame. This suggests that a clock second is not an interval of
universal
> time.
>
> The question:
> Which of these two views of SR is correct????
>
> Ken Seto
>
> Some Contradictory Claims of SR
- Next message: Angelo: "Re: Isotope decay chains"
- Previous message: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- In reply to: kenseto: "Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Next in thread: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Reply: kenseto: "Re: Some Contradictory Claims in SR:"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|