Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong
From: Jesse Mazer (vze2ztqw_at_mail.verizon.net)
Date: 02/08/05
- Next message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Previous message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- In reply to: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Next in thread: jgreenfield_at_seol.net.au: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: jgreenfield_at_seol.net.au: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 02:37:57 GMT
guskz@hotmail.com wrote:
>There are but a few simple lines (5 sentences) below until a Conclusion
>is reached.
>
>Someone must clearly specify the first line he reads that is incorrect
>and why.....if no error is wrong than there remains insufficient
>evidence of time dilation (outside the muons experiment).
>
>
>Setting:
>
>We will call 2 platforms: A & B
>
>A goes 10km/s and B goes 40km/s in relation to Earth (difference =
>30km/s)
>
>Now if Earth disappeared, the only thing A would observe is that B is
>30km/s faster and likewise B would observe A moving 30km/s.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Symptom:
>
>Relativity's Law specifies there is no Universal Absolute Reference
>Frame (everything is relative), so by this law it is irrelevant to Time
>Dilation wether A must *accelerate* or *decelerate* to reach same
>velocity as B.
>
>This same symptom also applies to B if it wishes to reach A's velocity.
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Conclusion:
>
>By the symptoms provide above, it is impossible for A or B to age
>differently than the other and therefore there cannot be any Time
>Dilation.
>
What do you mean by "age differently"? As long as both continue to move
at a constant velocity relative to another, relativity says there is no
absolute truth about who is aging slower--B is aging slower in A's
reference frame, and A is aging slower in B's reference frame.
>
>Likewise, it is impossible for a twin to leave A, until he reaches the
>same velocity as B and then accumulate an age difference *depending* on
>how long he remains at the same velocity as B (also the same if twin is
>leaving B and going to A).
>
If two twins on platform A start out at rest to each other and the same
age, then one twin changes velocity until his velocity matches that of
platform B, then in platform A's frame the twin who changed velocity is
aging slower, and in platform B's frame the twin who remained on
platform A is aging slower. But in order for them to actually compare
ages at a single location, one of them will have to change velocities
again, and this will break the symmetry, so both frames will make the
same prediction about who has aged less when they meet again.
Jesse
- Next message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- Previous message: Gregory L. Hansen: "Re: Inertial-dampening systems"
- In reply to: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Next in thread: jgreenfield_at_seol.net.au: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: jgreenfield_at_seol.net.au: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Reply: guskz_at_hotmail.com: "Re: Time Dilation Model, NO ONE can point out what's wrong"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
