0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
There are some failures in your analysis of relativity. SR is not the failure you suspect. The failure is your interpretation of SR. There is no perpendicular path for light in vector speed. The spectrum where photons exist are not particles A moving to B. It is merely a wave on the spectrum same as any other alpha or Bata wave on the spectrum. Electrons do not travel to the dual slit only the representative wave of the electron travels at c. Dilation of the clock in the forward vector with a ship takes the geometry of the hypotenuse of a right triangle. Half the speed of light is a 30,60,90 triangle. Cos 30 = 0.866025 which represents the clocks reduction in tick rate relative to one. The reduction in tick rate is due to the increased travel distance of the hypotenuse. This is the same value as the Lorentz contraction using Euclidean geometry. The speed of light is c but the distance is the hypotenuse 1.33075. I can even explain the equivalence in GR if you like. But there is nothing wrong with SR or GR. Stay on the path. You might learn Relativity properly.
That means that in a two way experiment, where you get to a speed, you're doing a local measurement, defined by your own clock and ruler, relative what you measured to be the distance between those mirrors you set up. The mirrors being 'at rest' relative yourself. But it has nothing to say about which way you are 'moving' as a whole 'system' and it doesn't really matter for measuring 'c'.
That phrase is wrong : " The velocity of light is always the same value ( c ) according to everything"
That phrase contains the nuance: The velocity of light is always measured the same value ( c) by the present measuring experiment.
Substantially, we must consider the increasing or decreasing speed of the distance between the defined photon and its emitting point on LCS.
Well there is a contribution that's been proved experimentally, called a recoil. As that 'photon' leaves, the material it left recoils, due to conservation laws. Whether one want to see that as a 'photon propagating' or just as a example of conservation laws is another thing.
Slower And Faster Tempo Of Time At The Same ClockFigure-1: To = T'o = 0 [SIZE="2"]..................A………….........………S……........………B[/SIZE]Figure-2 Tı = 10 earth-second1- We want to analyze spaceship's motion by the theory of SR or Lorentz's analysis. The value of its speed is "v" according to The Earth. 2- The Earth is a reference frame.3- The spaceship has a source of light (a flash). And an observer is on the Earth.4- At the moment of To The observer and the flash are at the point "A". And it flashes.5- Light impulse of the flash has the same value of speed "c" according to the spaceship and the Earth (according to the theory).6- Flash's light can travel to every direction. We consider the same directional light for first analysis (Fig.-2).7- At the moment Tı (= 10 earth-second) the light is at the point "B" and the spaceship is at the point "S". 8- The results according to the theory: (t=10 - 0=10 earth-second)AS = v.t = 1 800 000 earth-kmL = AB =c.t= 3 000 000 earth-km (traveling length for light according to earth and the unit of earth)SB = 1 200 000 earth-kmL'(same) = SB = 1 200 000 / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 1 500 000 ship-km (traveling length for the same light according to spaceship and the unit of ship).
t'(same) = (t - v.L/c^2) / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 5 ship-second (traveling time of the same light according to spaceship).c = L'(same) / t'(same) = 1 500 000 / 5 = 300 000 space-km/space-second. OK. THE THEORY IS CERTIFICATED.
The speed of light is c but the distance is the hypotenuse 1.33075.
xersanogen #56QuoteIf we suppose that the source throws the photons, then the relationship between the light and its source (or moving body) is defined by momentary relativity by-which the light instantly transfers to the LCS. In this case, the LCS is the co-reference frame for the motions of the light and the other actors (source, observer, everything). The values of all parametersinvolved must be determined based on a co-reference frame, which is the LCS for light kinematics.You mentioned marking the ground where the ball motion originated. Where do you mark for the emission point of light? If it is a material emitter, how fast is it moving in space?
If we suppose that the source throws the photons, then the relationship between the light and its source (or moving body) is defined by momentary relativity by-which the light instantly transfers to the LCS. In this case, the LCS is the co-reference frame for the motions of the light and the other actors (source, observer, everything). The values of all parametersinvolved must be determined based on a co-reference frame, which is the LCS for light kinematics.
It's 'time' that defines a speed, time over distance. Instants or happenings are what counts here. Whether a 'source' goes in one, or another direction, under the instant a 'photon' is released is of no importance for 'c', as it is a observer dependent factor. Think of doing a two (way) mirror experiment on Earth, you reverse its direction and still get 'c' . Relative motion is of no importance to this. But if you have a feeling of that 'speeds' isn't what defines it then I think I might agree.
The first point one need to see is that there is no defined way of measuring a speed, except as compared to something else. In a black box scenario (SR) all 'uniform speeds' are equivalent inside that box, no way to differ between them experimentally. So any suggestion of defining a 'speed' is doomed to fail. It's comparisons, and your uniform motion will change, as soon as you pick something else to measure it by.=That means that in a two way experiment, where you get to a speed, you're doing a local measurement, defined by your own clock and ruler, relative what you measured to be the distance between those mirrors you set up. The mirrors being 'at rest' relative yourself. But it has nothing to say about which way you are 'moving' as a whole 'system' and it doesn't really matter for measuring 'c'.
The collapse of Special Relativity [1]I study upon light kinematics and I have some new results/methods for space-time. One of them menaces the SR seriously. I have followed forums about special relativity. I am glad for finding some objectors. My determination will approve their arguments. In the forums which I joined, I tested the ability of understanding of my statement. The new concept was declared in few forums and by my book (at April 2008). The new concept/master key will declare at August 25, 2008 (at the end of Beijing Olympics) on this thread.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 19/04/2017 12:34:43That phrase is wrong : " The velocity of light is always the same value ( c ) according to everything"No, this is not wrong, this is correct.QuoteThat phrase contains the nuance: The velocity of light is always measured the same value ( c) by the present measuring experiment.This is also correct.QuoteSubstantially, we must consider the increasing or decreasing speed of the distance between the defined photon and its emitting point on LCS. This is incorrect. The only way to measure is local and freezing of position. You are trying to suggest a preferred frame. There is no preferred frame. You cannot measure something of which you are a part. You are a part of the motion of the universe.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 09/08/2008 18:30:33The collapse of Special Relativity [1]I study upon light kinematics and I have some new results/methods for space-time. One of them menaces the SR seriously. I have followed forums about special relativity. I am glad for finding some objectors. My determination will approve their arguments. In the forums which I joined, I tested the ability of understanding of my statement. The new concept was declared in few forums and by my book (at April 2008). The new concept/master key will declare at August 25, 2008 (at the end of Beijing Olympics) on this thread.Do you want to know why you are incorrect? SR is correct relative to the definition of time.
In order to argue against Relativity you must first fully understand the principles of the theory. What you have have done is argue against a straw-man version of your own making. You will get nowhere by basing your argument on an erroneous interpretation of the theory.
Quote from: Janus on 19/04/2017 18:20:36 In order to argue against Relativity you must first fully understand the principles of the theory. What you have have done is argue against a straw-man version of your own making. You will get nowhere by basing your argument on an erroneous interpretation of the theory. I work to answer the messages. but I did not understand your argument. Please present a figure.
Quote from: GoC on 19/04/2017 13:43:18Quote from: xersanozgen on 19/04/2017 12:34:43That phrase is wrong : " The velocity of light is always the same value ( c ) according to everything"No, this is not wrong, this is correct.QuoteThat phrase contains the nuance: The velocity of light is always measured the same value ( c) by the present measuring experiment.This is also correct.QuoteSubstantially, we must consider the increasing or decreasing speed of the distance between the defined photon and its emitting point on LCS. This is incorrect. The only way to measure is local and freezing of position. You are trying to suggest a preferred frame. There is no preferred frame. You cannot measure something of which you are a part. You are a part of the motion of the universe.SR says that a photon always moves away from its sources. Is this correct for the next moments of flowing time?Please think in four and more dimensions.
SR says that a photon always moves away from its sources. Is this correct for the next moments of flowing time?