0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

If it does how do we prove it? Any frame we occupy will not show it.

Quote from: jeffreyH on 14/10/2014 22:38:46If it does how do we prove it? Any frame we occupy will not show it.Length contraction is used to derive many things in applied physics which are borne out by experiment which means that we have confirmation that it's valid.

Lenght contraction is measurable ...

Quote from: lightarrowLenght contraction is measurable ...In what sense do you say that it's measureable? Just because something can be measured it doesn't mean that it has been measured. Do you know of any experiments in which length contraction was measured other than in the sense that I said it was?

Quote from: PmbPhy on 16/10/2014 03:09:01Quote from: lightarrowLenght contraction is measurable ...In what sense do you say that it's measureable? Just because something can be measured it doesn't mean that it has been measured. Do you know of any experiments in which length contraction was measured other than in the sense that I said it was?I intended "indirect measurement".As an example, look at post # 13 in this thread:...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN []--lightarrow

"...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN"Ah! The "good old days" of PF. []

Quote from: Bill S on 16/10/2014 23:40:48"...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN"Ah! The "good old days" of PF. []That forum got filled up with nasty people and people get banned at the drop of a hat. The prohibit people who don't think like the do too. E.g. I was banned for explaining what relativistic mass was when people asked why E = mc^{2} fails to work with photons which have "zero mass" even though relativist mass is used in the domain of mainstream physics.

Hi Pete do you have a page on the relativistic mass of the photon? I will be looking into that soon.

I am now very uncertain about length contraction. There certainly is an effect but is much less pronounced that time dilation. It is proving to be a difficulty and it won't go away. Which annoys me. It would be much easier without it.

Quote from: jeffreyH on 28/10/2014 00:04:34I am now very uncertain about length contraction. There certainly is an effect but is much less pronounced that time dilation. It is proving to be a difficulty and it won't go away. Which annoys me. It would be much easier without it.It would be much easier even if it would be F = m*v instead of F = m*a, or if the gravitational force between two masses would be F = m1+m2, or if Maxwell's equations were E = q (electric charge); B = j (electric current),......but it's not.--lightarrow

I have no problem with any of the above but length contraction is odd. It can be thought of much like a recursive function.

Quote from: jeffreyH on 28/10/2014 19:57:42I have no problem with any of the above but length contraction is odd. It can be thought of much like a recursive function.You mean in numerical analysis? You can identify what is negligible (if there is); if B is negligible respect to A, you write the equation using the rate B/A. If, for example, an electron's energy E in an accelerator is much greater than its invariant mass m, you write the equation E^{2} = (c*p)^{2} + (mc^{2})^{2} in this way:1 = (c*p/E)^{2} + (m*c^{2}/E)^{2}c*p/E = sqrt[1 - (m*c^{2}/E)^{2}]p = γ*m*v:γ = (E/m*v*c) * sqrt[1 - (m*c^{2}/E)^{2}].Now, if (m*c^{2}/E)^{2} << 1:γ ≈ (E/m*v*c) * [1 - ½ (m*c^{2}/E)^{2}]or, if you prefer, writing x instead of (m*c^{2}/E)^{2} and β instead of v/c:γ ≈ (1/β*x) * (1 - ½ x^{2}) ≈ (1/β*x) → (since γ^{2} = 1/(1-β^{2}) ) → γ ≈ 1/x.Have no idea if all this could have been useful for you, however.--lightarrow

Quote from: lightarrow on 28/10/2014 18:15:58Quote from: jeffreyH on 28/10/2014 00:04:34I am now very uncertain about length contraction. There certainly is an effect but is much less pronounced that time dilation. It is proving to be a difficulty and it won't go away. Which annoys me. It would be much easier without it.It would be much easier even if it would be F = m*v instead of F = m*a, or if the gravitational force between two masses would be F = m1+m2, or if Maxwell's equations were E = q (electric charge); B = j (electric current),......but it's not.--lightarrowI have no problem with any of the above but length contraction is odd. It can be thought of much like a recursive function.

Quote from: jeffreyH on 28/10/2014 19:57:42Quote from: lightarrow on 28/10/2014 18:15:58Quote from: jeffreyH on 28/10/2014 00:04:34I am now very uncertain about length contraction. There certainly is an effect but is much less pronounced that time dilation. It is proving to be a difficulty and it won't go away. Which annoys me. It would be much easier without it.It would be much easier even if it would be F = m*v instead of F = m*a, or if the gravitational force between two masses would be F = m1+m2, or if Maxwell's equations were E = q (electric charge); B = j (electric current),......but it's not.--lightarrowI have no problem with any of the above but length contraction is odd. It can be thought of much like a recursive function.When you heat a metal object, its length changes since it is not rigid. Chemistry shows objects to be composed of discrete elements bound by em forces. It shouldn't be surprising then, that in a dynamic universe, with a constant propagation speed for light, em fields are deformable when moving.Suggested research: "Oliver Heaviside".Here is why lc is necessary....sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

I think I need to go and derive a mass equation.

Quote from: jeffreyH on 30/10/2014 23:13:25I think I need to go and derive a mass equation.The cycle time for a photon exchange over a distance d at rest is d/c=t.The cycle time for a photon exchange over a distance d moving is d'/c=t'= γt (time dilation). The em force f = Q/d^2. The effective distance d'= γd. The effective force f' = Q/(γd)^2 = f/γ^2 < f.Since f' is equal in x and p (any perpendicular) direction, and the acceleration is in x, this allows compression in x. Td and lc both result from extended spatial paths for photons, which results from object motion.

An easy way to understand length contraction, is to first think about reality itself.Picture yourself having no education within the field of physics at all. However, you are interested in the concept of motion. And so if you then bother to independently analyze the idea of absolute motion that takes place within an absolute 4 dimensional environment known as Space-Time, this eventually leads you to Special Relativity and the derivation of all of its mathematical equations. Anyone can figure it out on their own, if they simply bother to try. This ever so simple analysis of motion, provides you with a full understanding of length contraction, time dilation, velocity addition, and Lorentz transformations.A casual presentation of this analysis of motion, which starts from scratch, and its outcome, can be found at //www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKAwpEetJ-Q [nofollow]

Quote from: phyti39 on 02/11/2014 18:26:11Quote from: jeffreyH on 30/10/2014 23:13:25I think I need to go and derive a mass equation.The cycle time for a photon exchange over a distance d at rest is d/c=t.The cycle time for a photon exchange over a distance d moving is d'/c=t'= γt (time dilation). The em force f = Q/d^2. The effective distance d'= γd. The effective force f' = Q/(γd)^2 = f/γ^2 < f.Since f' is equal in x and p (any perpendicular) direction, and the acceleration is in x, this allows compression in x. Td and lc both result from extended spatial paths for photons, which results from object motion.What about motion through a gravitational field? This takes account of velocity or acceleration without regard to a gravitational field external to the moving mass.

Length contraction is based upon rotation taking place within the 4 dimensional Space-Time environment.If you have two identical pencils, (A) and (B), and both extend across space only, if you rotate pencil (A) such that it begins to extend across the dimension of time, less of it now extends across the dimension of space. Hence a spatial length contraction of pencil (A) has occurred. Since the two pencils are no longer oriented in the same manner within Space-Time, if you look at pencil (B) from pencil (A's) point of view, it appears as though pencil (B) has experienced spatial length contraction, even though it had not.

Well like I have said, if you watch my videos you will have a whole new understanding of Special Relativity. So if you grab a coffee and maybe watch it on youtube on TV, you will be fascinated at what brings Special Relativity into reality being in the first place.

Quote from: NUFOIB on 16/11/2014 02:45:50Well like I have said, if you watch my videos you will have a whole new understanding of Special Relativity. So if you grab a coffee and maybe watch it on youtube on TV, you will be fascinated at what brings Special Relativity into reality being in the first place.It would be better if you stated your theory here in the new theories section. I have better things to do than sit through long videos.

As shown within the videos, length contraction is due to rotation within the 4 dimensional Space-Time environment.

WELL LOOK AT IT THIS WAY.....For one thing, I do not venture into such things such as theories, nor do I create them. Instead, I just analyze, via the use of pure logic, and do so from ground zero, rather than rest my work upon the previous work of others.

Quote from: NUFOIBWELL LOOK AT IT THIS WAY.....For one thing, I do not venture into such things such as theories, nor do I create them. Instead, I just analyze, via the use of pure logic, and do so from ground zero, rather than rest my work upon the previous work of others.Then what you're doing is not physics so why bring it to a physics forum. If you want to learn what physics is and how it works you'll have to do more than sit at home and think since mere logic is insufficient to do physics. One has to know what nature is doing so one has to learn the observations made my scientists. Without studying the results of such experiments and observations and as well as knowing current theories and how they came to be that way then you really talking about science.If you want to study/do physics then I suggest that you read these two papers:http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/ref/philosophy_physics.pdf [nofollow]http://home.comcast.net/~peter.m.brown/ref/what_is_science.pdf [nofollow]

Be cool my friend, we all have our own way. You're brave but maybe you need to put it where it belongs, New Theories. That doesn't mean that people won't read you, and argue But, that's life, isn't it?

When dealing with Special Relativity, the "theory" of Special Relativity itself appears to be all that most people are interested in.

Most people are quite happy with this limited reach.

They can only see the structure of SR from the inside.

Thus, being trapped on the inside, they can not see SR "Absolutely",

In turn, they can not understand Special Relativity in an absolute sense.

On the other hand, if you see SR from the outside, and thus see it as a singularity,

then you can see it at work with your mind, and do so with merely a single image within your mind. With this single image, you can derive each and every one of the SR equations within mere minutes. See ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN However, incompleteness becomes a must when it comes to satisfaction for most folk, so they are just not interested in absolute understanding of SR.