Re: Fastest Time

franklinhu_at_yahoo.com
Date: 03/27/05 

Date: 26 Mar 2005 21:48:34 -0800

PD wrote:
>
> What special relativity says instead is, not only is it not possible
to
> identify an object as having zero velocity in space, it is also not
> possible to rank objects according to velocity, as that ranking
depends
> solely on the choice of observer and has no independent reality.
>

Can you expand upon this statement, since I have often wondered about
this idea that you can stack rank objects according to speed by
measuring the rate at which time flows at each object. Logically, if
you placed an atomic clock at points (or reference frames) A, B and C,
leave them there for some time and then bring them all back ot point A,
you could tell the relative differences between the flow of time due to
the changed time shown and hence the relative speed (assuming there
aren't effects due to gravity slowing down the clock as well). I don't
think it matters where you start this measurement from point A or point
C, you should then be able to do the same test with objects D, E, F and
start to build up an absolute rank order of slowest to fastest. One of
these points will have the absolute slowest speed. This doesn't mean
this position is necessarily at zero velocity, but I would think it
would be possible to at least stack rank them. If it were possible to
find a frame of reference which was slower than any other frame, then
this might be a zero velocity frame - but you say this is impossible,
why?
fhutime