0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Show me one quote from Einstein explaining it.
Einstein simply has no explanation for Sagnac effect,
So SR predicts Sagnac just fine
Quote from: Centra on 18/01/2022 22:38:00Show me one quote from Einstein explaining it.Just to be clear...How old do you think that Einstein and Langevin were when that paper was published?
Quote from: Centra on 18/01/2022 22:38:00Einstein simply has no explanation for Sagnac effect, Yes he does.Quote from: Halc on 18/01/2022 20:56:20 So SR predicts Sagnac just fine
This author has located no reference at all by Einstein to the Sagnac tests, and that can be viewed as very strange because the tests were on the speed of light, which is the basis and core of SR. Einstein visited Miller in the U.S.A. in 1921, where tests on the speed of light were in progress. Lorentz also visited the same site. Sagnac's work was referenced by Silberstein (1921), who worked with Michelson on the latter's 1925 tests (described later). Miller was a co-worker of Michelson. Silberstein (1921) remarked, "As a matter of fact, Einstein himself never entered into the details of this important problem of rotation" and "In fine, the optical circuit experiment may easily become crucial and fatal for Einstein's theory." Quote
So your point is that a 63 year old man is incapable of writing?
Quote from: Centra on 19/01/2022 06:23:11So your point is that a 63 year old man is incapable of writing?No, my point is that your focus on what just 2 old men, among thousands of scientists, is absurd.
Here is something to consider in regard to relative velocity of inertial frames. If one sphere has a mass of 10 kg and another has a mass of 1 kg and their motion is such that the distance between them is increasing at, say, 165,000 km/s, can they be considered to be moving away from each other at the same velocity for purposes of calculating time dilation?
Maybe not, maybe they should really be considered to be moving away from a certain point between them which is determined by their relative masses, like the barycenter of two orbiting masses. The 10 kg sphere would be considered to be moving away from that point at a lesser velocity than the 1 kg sphere is. The following is just to illustrate the principle involved, I don't know for certain that the velocities relative to the barycenter would be a simple ratio of 1 to 10, it would have to be close. For this illustration it's not necessary to have the exact velocities anyway, just that they total the same as the direct velocity between the two spheres. The difference shwn at the end of the illustration is so great that I can't see it mattering what the exact figures would be, because the two velocities relative to the barycenter would definitely not be equal, whatever their true exact values might be.
If the 10 kg sphere is moving away from the barycenter at velocity 15,000 km/s and the 1 kg sphere is moving away from it in the opposite direction at 150,000 km/s, you might calculate the apparent time dilation from either frame to be the simple sum of those two velocities,165,000 km/s. Using a time dilation calculator based on Einstein's equations and enter a time interval of 1 second and an observer velocity of 165,000 km/s the answer 1.197728 seconds. Now what happens when you, instead, enter the velocities of each sphere relative to the barycenter separately? For the 10 kg sphere you enter 15,000 km/s and get 1.001254 seconds. For the 1 kg sphere you enter 150,000 km/s and get 1.154967 seconds. What happens when you find the difference between those two figures? You get the true time difference which would be perceived in both frames in relation to the other, 0.153713 seconds, which is not the same as 0.197728 seconds, which is what we got by entering the sum of the two velocities as a single figure.
It appears that I may have identified a flaw in Einstein's equations for time dilation. Time dilation cannot be accurately calculated from the velocity of two objects of different masses as a single velocity relative to each other, it can only be calculated from the separate velocities of each relative to their barycenter, in my opinion. If those spheres were the only two objects in a vacuum, their barycenter would be the reference for "stationary time" and their velocities and perceived time dilation would each be relative to it, if velocity based time dilation is a reality. If their gravitational time dilation is different based on their different masses then, logically, so would their motion based time dilation be, and using their barycenter as the reference would be the logical way to deal with that, just like it's used to deal with the orbit of two masses.
This shows that it may not always be wise to accept theories as being valid just because they've been accepted by many for a long period of time, flaws could be identified at any time, like with the theory of the sun revolving around the earth
This actually shows that you do not know what you are talking about.In university you are not asked to 'accept' theories you are tasked with proving that they are accurate by experiments and mathematics.
So why do you hold at least one of them out to be the authority on the characteristics of light in relative frames?
Do you seriously think I accept your pronouncements as valid in any way?
It appears that I may have identified a flaw in Einstein's equations for time dilation.
Quote from: Centra on 19/01/2022 10:52:00So why do you hold at least one of them out to be the authority on the characteristics of light in relative frames?I didn't.This is what I said was the authority.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativityhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativityIt's called experimental evidence.
Quote from: Centra on 19/01/2022 11:50:51It appears that I may have identified a flaw in Einstein's equations for time dilation. It only appears that way to you.
Quote from: Centra on 19/01/2022 14:05:02Do you seriously think I accept your pronouncements as valid in any way?We don't think you accept science...
It is in no way logical that two objects of different masses should be considered as equally moving away from each other in a vacuum
Say we got rid of the mountains moving; need for dark energy unicorns never seen in the lab. The energy balance is smaller so we need to another explanation, that uses less energy. If we combine the equivalency principle, we have the exothermic output of gravity as mass lowers gravitational potential. This will create an affect that look like anti-gravity such as centrifugal force; rotation, and expansions. There is no extra energy needed; correct fuel amount.
A time dilation calculator shows that objects with relative velocity of 100,000 km/s would supposedly show time dilation of 1.060752 seconds from one observer's point of view, and objects with relative velocity of 200,000 km/s would show 1.342385
So if two objects are moving in the same straight axis in opposite directions from a third object, all of equal mass, at velocity of 100,000 km/s each from that middle object, would the two outer objects show the same times or different times on their clocks?
I guess you have a problem.