0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
From the perspective of stationary observer, wavefront will travel the distance of 1 from the point of origin and will be 0,5ls ahead of the ship.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 10/04/2021 21:32:27From the perspective of stationary observer, wavefront will travel the distance of 1 from the point of origin and will be 0,5ls ahead of the ship.How would that be possible? How can the light be .5 ls in front of ship and simultaneously be 1 ls ahead of the ship?
Obviously theoretical physicists aren't bothered too much by the fact, that both models of relativity give us results, that are contradicting each other, since in the last 100 years no one didn't try to look for any other solution to the problem of constant c in relative motion - no one except me, but since I'm not a professional physicist, it probably doesn't count...
It's like the call for relativity of simultaneity
Quote from: Origin on 10/04/2021 22:09:06Quote from: CrazyScientist on 10/04/2021 21:32:27From the perspective of stationary observer, wavefront will travel the distance of 1 from the point of origin and will be 0,5ls ahead of the ship.How would that be possible? How can the light be .5 ls in front of ship and simultaneously be 1 ls ahead of the ship?It's like the call for relativity of simultaneity.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 05/04/2021 21:45:24Obviously theoretical physicists aren't bothered too much by the fact, that both models of relativity give us results, that are contradicting each other, since in the last 100 years no one didn't try to look for any other solution to the problem of constant c in relative motion - no one except me, but since I'm not a professional physicist, it probably doesn't count...You don't seem to read much about history of science and scientific progress. Even Wikipedia has some articles covering this. It's just no alternative solution has been successful in explaining various experimental results related to measurement of light speed from various movements of objects.
Actually in my model, simultaneity remains absolute, as the timeline is being shared between all inertial frames.
Can you possibly provide some links? In fact I did look for something similar to my own model and I couldn't find anything. If you look at the movies, which I've posted in my previous posts, you'll see that I always try to provide some peer-revieved publications to backup most of my claims, that seem to be rather controversial...
We are having a communication problem here, CrazyScientist.You said:Quote from: CrazyScientist on 10/04/2021 21:32:27From the perspective of stationary observer, wavefront will travel the distance of 1 from the point of origin and will be 0,5ls ahead of the ship.This is a problem because velocities are directly added in Galilean relativity, which means the speed of light as seen by the observer at rest should be 1.5c. In your modified Galilean relativity you implied that the speed of light is not added to the speed of the source. In fact you said the speed of light will be measured as c by all observers regardless of there inertial frames. This is a problem because this is in direct conflict with the Galilean transforms. So what you are saying is the transforms work for all speeds except light speed. That is not mathematically consistent.But moving on, in your modified Galilean relativity, you say the at rest observer will see the light pulse moving at c so the wave front will have moved 1 ls in 1 sec so the wavefront will be .5 ls ahead of the ship.The observers on the ship will see the speed of light as c, so after 1 sec the wavefront will be 1 ls ahead of the ship.These answers are inconflict. Why? Because you cannot arbitrarily change the Galilean transforms to handle certain velocities different from other velocities.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 11/04/2021 00:45:13Actually in my model, simultaneity remains absolute, as the timeline is being shared between all inertial frames.If that's the case, then light has a constant speed when measured by the observer. But if there are more than one observers with non-zero relative velocities, which one would measure c?
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 11/04/2021 01:02:27Can you possibly provide some links? In fact I did look for something similar to my own model and I couldn't find anything. If you look at the movies, which I've posted in my previous posts, you'll see that I always try to provide some peer-revieved publications to backup most of my claims, that seem to be rather controversial...Your first claim was that nobody came out with alternative theory to relativity, not that nobody came out with your theory. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_special_relativityhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritz_ballistic_theoryhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory
All of them Here for example we have 3 observers, where 2 of them have non-zero velocity - and constant c is maintained for all of them...
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 11/04/2021 05:33:07All of them Here for example we have 3 observers, where 2 of them have non-zero velocity - and constant c is maintained for all of them...So your theory is the same as SRT, which is no longer considered as a new theory.
My theory is "the same" as SRT in the sense that both models are capable to maintain the constant c in relative motion - and this is where the similarities end. You might say as well that ships are the same as planes - as both are capable to transport stuff between continents...
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 11/04/2021 09:36:45My theory is "the same" as SRT in the sense that both models are capable to maintain the constant c in relative motion - and this is where the similarities end. You might say as well that ships are the same as planes - as both are capable to transport stuff between continents...Do your theory predicts the same results as SRT? Is there any difference?
Or maybe you just didn't see no reason to read any of my posts in this thread
First of all, let's just look at Special Relativity, where a single distance in space can have different lenghts for 2 observers simultaneously (lenght contraction), single physical process can take place at different rates at the same time (time dilation), events can happen at different moments of a timeline and at different order or eventually become simultaneous in one frame (relative simultaneity) - and somehow no one doesn't ask, how can it be possible... Obviously no one will ever doubt in any of your claims, if your name is Albert Einstein
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 11/04/2021 13:26:28Or maybe you just didn't see no reason to read any of my posts in this threadOn the contrary, I did see no reason to read any of your posts.