Re: The train and the light inside.


"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1140714833.788267.253820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

tomgee wrote:
PD wrote:
tomgee wrote:
Spaceman wrote:
"Igor" <thoovler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1140550474.168851.260960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
And when did you do your experiment that proved that they don't
measure
the same speed c?

The problem is, how could they?
An outside observer could not measure
c for what an inside observer is measuring c for already.
the relative speeds are being ignored if such is true.

It seems that way to you, but I contend that the outside observer has
a
faster time rate than has the train because the train is moving
faster
than he is,

How do you know that, tomgee?

The same way you know that, PD, since I have told you how over and
over. It's very simple and undeniable. When two objects are at
constant velocity wrt each other, they must be moving at the same speed
and in the same direction. Thus, you and your TV are at CV when you
sit and watch it. However, when you get up to go pee, during the time
you are moving, you are not at CV wrt your TV. Then, you are moving
faster than your TV because at CV both of you are at CV with the planet
also, but when you move, you are moving faster than the TV and the
planet too. The TV and the planet remain at the same speed and moving
in the same direction so they remain at CV wrt each other. But not
you. Once you move from your seat, you are no longer at CV with the TV
and the Earth because you are no longer moving at the same speed and in
the same direction, but now you must move slightly faster than the two
in order to get somewhere else (your potty) and return later to the TV.

It is indeed very simple and not at all what you described.
Let me illustrate with two examples and ask you some pertinent
questions.
Example 1:
Two cars take off from a stop light and both cars accelerate. While
they accelerate, they are not at constant velocity, apparently.
However, if they have the same rate of acceleration, then they stay
abreast of each other and they have zero *relative* motion. Is it your
position still that constant relative motion implies constant velocity
of each?

PD,
What is wrong with you?
Of course it does.
If 2 objects are at the same acceleration,
they still maintain a 0 relative to each other constant motion
If they are at a different rate of acceleration they are not
at 0 relative motion to each other.


Example 2: I'm sitting on a train headed east at 97 mph. While I'm
sitting, both the train and I have the same constant speed relative to
the earth (97 mph) and our relative speed is zero. Now I get up because
I have to pee, and I walk toward the restroom at the back of the train.
Now the train is moving 97 mph with respect to the earth, and I'm
moving 94 mph with respect to the track. Is it still your position that
in my getting up and starting to walk at 3 mph, I'm traveling faster
than the train?

That is not what he stated.
You always love to twist like that huh?


During the time you went off and returned, time for you passed slightly
slower than it did for your TV and the Earth. Meaning that you aged
slightly less than did your TV or the planet. I know it's hard for you
to believe all this, but it's based on SR and the second law of
thermodynamics.

If it so happens that the train is
traveling west, then I think I can argue that the train is traveling
*slower* than the fella on the tracks. Do you see why?

Assuming the experiment declared a certain direction in which the train
is moving, the experiment did not depend on the direction at all since
the two observers were not said to be at CV wrt each other. Direction,
then, does not enter into the experiment, only the fact that one
observer is moving faster than the other.

So, regardless whether I walk to the front of the train or toward the
back of the train (see example 2 above), I'm still traveling faster
than the train.

Compared to the 0 relative motion, anything that is not
0 with such relative motion is moving faster relatively than the 0
speed relative objects are .. and of course it is only
relatively faster.
You should really learn about relative motion.
It is always relative.
You can't say anything is actually faster without
comparing them relatively.
Don't you even know how the relativity of motion works..
LOL
:)


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: relativity vs velocity addition
    ... GR(General Relativity) is also set up by claiming the velocity ... the two far sides of the train there is a clock and a light source. ... where v1 and v2 are the outbound and inbound relative speeds and B ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: "The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light"
    ... it but the speed of the observer would. ... with relativity it supports relativity while in fact the simplest ... "3.3 Tests of Light Speed from Moving Sources". ... to say "they travel in all possible directions at all possible speeds, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The train and the light inside.
    ... Let's say they are moving at CV as they accelerate, ... I'm sitting on a train headed east at 97 mph. ... Yes, you do, but you and the train are not at CV wrt to the earth. ... only you and the train changed speeds and so you are no longer at CV ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The train and the light inside.
    ... the relative speeds are being ignored if such is true. ... faster time rate than has the train because the train is moving faster ... they must be moving at the same speed ... They cannot be at CV with just "constant relative motion" unless they ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The train and the light inside.
    ... Let's say they are moving at CV as they accelerate, ... I'm sitting on a train headed east at 97 mph. ... Yes, you do, but you and the train are not at CV wrt to the earth. ... only you and the train changed speeds and so you are no longer at CV ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast