0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
They say that the life time of a candle flame (which has high relative speed) will increase according to rest candle.
Why should we defer to opinions when we have facts generated by experimental data? Facts are better than opinions.
The determination of "The Sun rotates around the Earth" is an experimental result.
I personally performed an experiment about Fitzgerald contraction.
I just share alternative synthesis.
This LCS concept allows cosmological analyzes and calculates the current age of the universe;
I'll repeat what Bored Chemist said earlier: what experiment did you perform to search for Fitzgerald contraction? It was an actual experiment, wasn't it? Not just a thought experiment?
Yes, it is a practical experiment; every one can perform; its budget is very low and easy:http://vixra.org/pdf/1905.0094v1.pdf
Quote from: xersanozgen on 06/10/2019 15:20:09Yes, it is a practical experiment; every one can perform; its budget is very low and easy:http://vixra.org/pdf/1905.0094v1.pdfIf your equipment was in the same reference frame as the conductor, it won't see any length contraction. So of course it won't measure any resistance change...
If you examine the process, in the M-M experiment, you can understand that the contraction must actually occur in the K' system so that the number of fringes does not change.
That is, the special theory of relativity is based on the fact that deformations occur by metabolically and actually.
My experience proves that conractions are not generated in the K' frame; because the measurements are isotropic.
However, a phenomenon that does not really occur and is perceived only by the external observer is not meaningful to science.
If you say the time dilation are visually perceived by only The observer of K system; in this case the legend of time travel becomes a myth/fairy tale.
How fast does something have to travel before it contracts by 0.4% ?
About 8.9% the speed of light: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/length-contraction
What do you mean by "metabolically"?
Are you defining K' as the reference frame of an observer moving with the apparatus or moving relative to the apparatus? In the frame of an observer co-moving with the apparatus (that is, the apparatus is at rest according to this observer) no contraction can be measured by said observer whereas in the frame of an observer that is not co-moving with the apparatus (that is, the apparatus is moving according to this second observer) a contraction will be observed.
Then I presume that what you call the K' frame is the frame where an observer is at rest relative to the apparatus. In such a case, no contraction is expected to be measured in the first place.
It if wasn't really occurring, it couldn't be observed by anyone. Yet it can be, so we know that it's really happening.