Re: Problem with Einstein's Train Thought Experiment

On May 2, 11:53 am, jrysk...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I agree that M and M' cannot be the same point in three dimensional
space because M is on the embankment and M' is on the train.

But that doesn't tell us what is occurring when a lightning strike
occurs at both A and A' and a second lightning strike also occurs at
B
and B'.

Simultaneity of Relativity does.

The answer to this is simple:  there is no A' or B' in the train
experiment.  Don't rewrite Einstein.  The problem with a lot of
commentators on the train experiment is that they rewrite it, trying
to correct for an error which they sense is there, but cannot
identify.

That is what you are doing.  Stick STRICTLY to the terms of the
experiment.  And don't say you are doing so, because you are the one
who inserted A' and B', when they are nowhere to be found in the train
experiment.

Go back, think carefully, and you will see that I am right.

And also, what exactly do you think Einstein is trying to DO in the
train experiment.  I think YOU think Einstein is trying to present an
argument with logical content, because I think YOU want an argument
with logical content.

Well, welcome to the world of "practical geometry" (constructivist
mathematics), in which the authors arguments do NOT want to present
arguments with logical content, because they believe such argument
only lead to paradox.

So watch out for this.  You are trying to defend Einstein from a
charge which he would ADMIT.

Indeed your observations have some support.

http://books.google.com/books?id=-r5IGSTJVPcC&pg=PA4&source=gbs_selected_pages&cad=0_1#PPA3,M1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

Sue...

 I suggest, to get a better grasp of the
history of mathematics out of which relativity emerges, you go back
over Einstein's "Geometry and Experience" essay, and also read a
wonderful book, A Garciadiego, BERTRAND RUSSELL AND THE ORIGINS OF THE
SET-THEORETIC 'PARADOXES.'

To say that the relativity of simultaneity lacks logical content, is
merely to say what Einstein himself believed.  My only contribution is
to say WHERE the logic of the argument falls down.  Just look at the
train experiment again, without changing it, and you will see that I
am obviously right.  I mean, come on, the geometry isn't clear enough
to you? and the artibtrary insertion Einstein makes isn't clear enough
to you?  What is this?  Just wake up.






.

Relevant Pages
Loading