0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
There you go with the non-sequitur again. What makes you say this? Time dilation has been experimentally verified. That demonstrates that your reasoning is flawed. We know that observers in different reference frames will measure different rates of the passage of time because we've actually measured it. When reasoning clashes with reality, you throw out the reasoning, not reality. You don't have to like it, but you can't pretend that your reasoning ability somehow overrides reality itself. Although length and duration can appear different to different observers, the total space-time interval will be agreed upon by all observers regardless of reference frame.
Let's take two candles (A; B) and burn them at the same time. Then, one of them (B) moves away by the train.When the candle A completes its life and extinguishes; we see B still on fire. Because the photon that determines the moment of B's finishing has not reached us yet, and needs time to travel the distance BA. So, to see the B's ending moment will delay. This perception does not change even if the train stops there or continues its movement. That is to say, we may think that the the lifetime of the candle B increased due to SR's time dilation. However, in this experiment, both candles live at the same normal tempo (metabolically). Their proper times/tempos are the same. If there is a confusion; suppose the train comes back and meets us while the candle continues to light. In this case we will see that both candles ended at the same moment. It means In this fiction, time dilation is not metabolically realized.
But, in MM experiment, Fitzgerald contraction (for the light's path on moving direction) must be really happened for the result of exp. (Same number of fringes). It means, the observer of K' frame perceives the contraction.
In my opinion, SR predicts/claims genuine deformations for moving body. My electrical resistance experience does not prove/support this inferences of the theory.
Of course we generally use visual sense. However we have to be interrogator; otherwise, all of tricks of magicians and illusionists would be supposed reality and somebodies would take seriously.
Please give me the link of this experiment.
That didn't do anything to tell me what you meant by "metabolically". What does this have to do with metabolism?
This does not follow. A person in the K' frame will see the lengths of both arms as the same and thus see that it takes light the same amount of time to reach the end of each arm. In this person's frame, the device isn't moving. There is no reason that contraction should be observed.
Special relativity predicts that you shouldn't have detected any deformations in the first place, so your findings are actually in accord with it.
So how do you explain experimental results as being an illusion? How is it that the illusion conveniently matches up precisely with the predictions of relativity?
Quote from: xersanozgen on 07/10/2019 14:41:34Please give me the link of this experiment.I already did. Go back and look at my post about the lithium ion experiment.
but, a similar deformation never be happened in our life because of universal motion of the world.
As I say; if the theory SR is consist of this, it will become fairy tale for adults.
I agree, there are visual deformations. The reason of them is the finite/limited value of light's velocity.
Probably it may be also similar to muon experiment.
They had neglected to consider the speed of reference muons.
dear Bored chemist,I know that there are people who consider the theory of SR on dogmatic pattern like a religion. They cannot perceive alternative hypotheses because of their blinders.I hope, perhaps they may allow theirselves to note other opposite/alternative ideas. Forums are useful for this.A scientific forum must encourage to discuss the new theories.I guess your attitudes were to represent them. Thanks for your efforts.My best regards...
Quote from: xersanozgen on Yesterday at 10:38:11but, a similar deformation never be happened in our life because of universal motion of the world.1- What is this "universal motion of the world" you speak of? Are you talking about an absolute reference frame? If so, then you are begging the question again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_questionQuote from: xersanozgen on Yesterday at 10:38:11As I say; if the theory SR is consist of this, it will become fairy tale for adults.2- Again, why do you conclude this?Quote from: xersanozgen on Yesterday at 10:38:11I agree, there are visual deformations. The reason of them is the finite/limited value of light's velocity.
If claimed deformations are visual;
1- In universe, everything has a motion. The world has also its motion according to Sun, galaxy, local cluster, ........etc.We use the earth as a co-reference frame for physical and other events. However , If we want to analyze the motion relation of Earth and a celestial object (e.g. Fornax cluster) we must use an outer/common reference frame how includes both of them. And -as a first step- we have to consider the centre of local cluster as the equivalent partner of Fornax.
2- If claimed deformations are visual; that space-time is also an illusion
SR does not impose/effect the life.
Even, it cannot transform the astronomical parameters to respected/ useful / simultaneous values.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 11/10/2019 13:05:221- In universe, everything has a motion. The world has also its motion according to Sun, galaxy, local cluster, ........etc.We use the earth as a co-reference frame for physical and other events. However , If we want to analyze the motion relation of Earth and a celestial object (e.g. Fornax cluster) we must use an outer/common reference frame how includes both of them. And -as a first step- we have to consider the centre of local cluster as the equivalent partner of Fornax.And all of that motion is relative (except for acceleration).Quote from: xersanozgen on 11/10/2019 13:05:222- If claimed deformations are visual; that space-time is also an illusionAs Bored Chemist said, they are physically real.Quote from: xersanozgen on 11/10/2019 13:05:22SR does not impose/effect the life.That depends on what you mean by "affect".Quote from: xersanozgen on 11/10/2019 13:05:22Even, it cannot transform the astronomical parameters to respected/ useful / simultaneous values.I don't understand this sentence.
That's definitely not a good start for you. You should shape up before you get banned for threats and insults.
Insults what you on about ?Guess you dunna understand my lingo . Thought you scientists meant be clever and know stuff like lingo da !Sad man, was hoping for some convo 🙁
Quote from: SarahConnor on 12/10/2019 01:52:47Insults what you on about ?Guess you dunna understand my lingo . Thought you scientists meant be clever and know stuff like lingo da !Sad man, was hoping for some convo 🙁Scientists understand lingo very well. Making threats to burn down a university is not convo, but can be classified as a terrorist threat, especially if the writer misrepresents their identity!I suggest you smart up if you want to remain a member here.
Anyway , I'm smarter than Einstein
Quote from: SarahConnor on 12/10/2019 10:56:55Anyway , I'm smarter than Einstein Only marginally, and he's dead.
You already tried that argument and it didn't work. The equation you offered predicted a linear relationship between velocity and red shift, whereas relativity predicts an exponential one. Relativity's prediction is the one with experimental support. You tried to save the equation by claiming that you have to use "universal velocity" instead of relative velocity, but that makes the problem worse. If we did live in a world with an absolute reference frame and red shift was dependent upon absolute velocity, then the radar guns used by police officers would have to be continually calibrated throughout the day and year to reflect that change in velocity over time due to the Earth's rotation and orbit.If what you are claiming instead is that we have to measure the difference in the universal velocity of the car and the universal velocity of the radar gun, then that simplifies right back to relative velocity again. It doesn't matter if the Milky Way galaxy was sitting still or moving at 50% the speed of light in some absolute frame: the red shift detected by the radar gun would be the exact same because it's measuring relative velocity. That was known long before special relativity was even conceived of.Time dilation is also far from the only observable prediction of relativity.An illusion caused by the finite speed of light cannot explain the observation of quadrupolar gravitational waves.An illusion caused by the finite speed of light cannot explain the observation of mass-energy conversion.An illusion caused by the finite speed of light cannot explain the precession of mercury's orbit.An illusion caused by the finite speed of light cannot explain the decay rate of neutron star's orbits.