The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: The Time Dilation Factor Oversight  (Read 7518 times)

Offline PmbPhy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2762
  • Thanked: 38 times
    • View Profile
Re: The Time Dilation Factor Oversight
« Reply #25 on: 30/06/2014 07:51:47 »
Quote from: butchmurray
The last reply to The Time Dilation Factor Oversight thread by PmbPhy was more than insulting.
You're wrong. Please stop trying to put words into my mouth. I made it very clear that I have years of experience with people who claim that everyone in the physics community is wrong and that they're right. I've tried a great deal in the past to help these people see the errors that they're making and in all cases they were unable to grasp the explanation. It's easy for any physicist to understand it but impossible for such people to. Not everyone has what it takes to be a physicist. That's not an insult. It's just a fact of life.

Quote from: butchmurray
He clearly attacked and intentionally offended me.
Clearly that's nonsense and a perfect example of why I don't talk to people like you. When your mistakes are pointed out to you and we show you that you're not the incredible genius that you thought you were you claim that we're insulting you. There's no way I'd continue to feed into this kind of nonsense and rude accusations.

Quote from: butchmurray
He made it obvious that he decided for every one else that I have zero credibility.
Only in your own paranoid mind.

Quote from: butchmurray
If people are attacked for thinking outside the box in New Theories what is the point?
That was hardly outside the box thinking. It was full of huge holes and had absolutely no validity to it. Please stop insulting the people who point out your mistakes or nobody will help you and we'll let you continue to think whatever you want to and live with the fantasy that you're right.

It's I who am insulted. I did you a major favor digging through your so-called "proof" and took a great deal of time reading it and paying close attention to it. That's how I found all the errors in it. Did you even thank me for taking the time to find the problems with it? Nope. All you did was to misread my last response about why I'll only point out mistakes in this subforum once because of my experience with other members of this and other forums. You didn't read it carefully that I was talking about other people and jumped to the false conclusion that I was talking about you. Then you insulted me for it. Shame on you. If you're going to act like that I'll be ignoring all of your posts from now on!

Pay close attention to what David Cooper said above. They are wise words which you should pay attention to!!
 

Offline butchmurray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • If I had my druthers, I would have druthers
    • View Profile
Re: The Time Dilation Factor Oversight
« Reply #26 on: 30/06/2014 18:34:30 »
Hi David,
I appreciate your advice and encouragement.
Thank you,
Butch
« Last Edit: 30/06/2014 19:30:21 by butchmurray »
 

Offline butchmurray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 194
  • If I had my druthers, I would have druthers
    • View Profile
Re: The Time Dilation Factor Oversight
« Reply #27 on: 20/07/2014 16:02:17 »
Thorntone E. Murray
July 20, 2014

The Lorentz Transformation Contradiction 

The Lorentz transformation equations:
1. x=x-vt/sqrt(1-(v/c))
2. y=y
3. z=z
4. t=t-(vx/c)/sqrt(1-(v/c))
 
     Let v represent the speed with which inertial frame K is in motion relative to inertial frame K.

In accordance with the Lorentz transformation, judged from frame K, a clock in frame K goes more slowly than a clock at rest in frame K. Also in accordance with the Lorentz transformation, a measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in frame K and an identical measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in frame K are of equal length relative to each other. As the speed of light is constant and the same for all observers, judged from frame K the time for light to travel the length of each rod is identical in K and K. Therefore, judged from frame K, the clock in frame K goes at the same rate as a clock at rest in frame K, not more slowly.
Then, in accordance with the Lorentz transformation, judged from frame K, the clock in frame K goes more slowly than the clock at rest in frame K and, concurrently, that same clock in frame K goes at the same rate as the clock at rest in frame K. Following is mathematical confirmation of that contradiction.

Parallel to the Direction of Motion:
The following is a quote from Dr. Albert Einsteins 1916 Relativity The Special and General Theory, Section 12 The Behavior of Measuring Rods and Clocks in Motion; translated by Robert W. Lawson.
Let us now consider a seconds-clock which is permanently situated at the origin (x=0) of K. t=0 and t=1 are two successive ticks of this clock. The first and fourth equations of the Lorentz transformation give for these two ticks:
          t=0
and
          t=1/sqrt(1-(v/c))
As judged from K, the clock is moving with the velocity v; as judged from this reference-body, the time which elapses between two strokes of the clock is not one second, but
          1/sqrt(1-(v/c))
seconds, i.e. a somewhat larger time. As a consequence of its motion the clock goes more slowly than when at rest. End quote.
Then, judged from K, one second in K equals 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)) seconds in K. The operative equation is t=t*1/sqrt(1-(v/c)).

Perpendicular to the Direction of Motion:
Judged from K with speed v=0, in frame K light at speed c travels the length L of a measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in the time t.
         L=ct   or   t=L/c       with speed v=0
Judged from K with speed v=0, light at speed c travels the length L of an identical measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in frame K in the time t.
         L=ct  or   t=L/c      with speed v=0
Judged from K with speed v=0, length L of the measuring rod in frame K is equal to length L of the identical measuring rod in frame K.
         L=L      with speed v=0
With speed v=0, frame K and frame K are at rest relative to each other. With speed v=0, time t in frame K is equal to time t in frame K.
         t=t      with speed v=0
In accordance with the second (and third) equation(s) of the Lorentz transformation, with speed v=0 and speed v>0, the length of a measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in frame K and the length of an identical measuring rod perpendicular to the direction of motion in frame K are of equal length relative to each other.
         y=y (z=z)    with speed v>0
Then, judged from K with speed v>0, length L of the measuring rod in frame K and length L of an identical measuring rod in frame K are equal.
          L=L     with speed v>0
As the speed of light is constant and the same for all observers, then:
          L/c=L/c    with speed v>0
Shown previously, t=L/c and t=L/c. As L/c=L/c with speed v>0, then:
          t=t     with speed v>0
Then, judged from K, one second in K equals one second in K. The operative equation is t=t.
Shown previously:
Judged from K, one second in K equals 1/sqrt(1-(v/c)) seconds in K. The operative equation is t=t*1/sqrt(1-(v/c)).

The Contradiction:
As a consequence of the Lorentz transformation, judged from frame K, t=t*1/sqrt(1-(v/c)) and t=t concurrently.

Therefore, the Lorentz transformation is invalid.

Thorntone E. Murray


« Last Edit: 21/07/2014 07:04:03 by butchmurray »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: The Time Dilation Factor Oversight
« Reply #27 on: 20/07/2014 16:02:17 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums