Is distance an absolute invariant?

  • 297 Replies
  • 17427 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4195
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #100 on: 06/02/2016 17:10:33 »
I am unaware of any problem arising from the absence of a fixed background, that is not attributable to human vanity!

Then I propose that we agree to disagree. I do appreciate that you don't want readers to get the wrong impression of scientific theories from posts made by amateurs. This is a problem I also wish to avoid.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #101 on: 06/02/2016 17:59:18 »
I am unaware of any problem arising from the absence of a fixed background, that is not attributable to human vanity!

Does this mean that it is an act of human vanity to suppose that one might truly understand the universe as an entirety, and be able to chart the universe, as we do our earth, in full detail of knowledge, via a theory of everything?

Because this is indeed what some, around 300, or so I've read, hardcore theoretical physicists are doing where quantum gravity is concerned.  By linking quantum to gravity, mass and gravitational field considerations would then indeed give both quantum and relativity an absolute reference frame from which to be equated.

Seems a reasonable enough quest to me Alan... You've surprise me with this comment really... I didn't think that you of all people would be paying any such blind homage to anything at all, let alone the 'church' of relativity....
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #102 on: 06/02/2016 19:46:01 »



Then I propose that we agree to disagree. I do appreciate that you don't want readers to get the wrong impression of scientific theories from posts made by amateurs. This is a problem I also wish to avoid.
This forum has a number of intelligent members of which I consider both Jeff and Alan to be a couple of the brightest. But I'm also sure that a majority here also realize, with proper humility, that humanity has by now means learned it all. Case in point; When anyone comes here to our forum and positions themselves as the only authority intelligent enough to understand when everyone else is somehow stupid, they should expect to suffer a great deal of grief from us. I think everyone knows who I'm talking about and it's certainly not Alan nor Jeff.

« Last Edit: 06/02/2016 19:48:30 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #103 on: 06/02/2016 21:00:12 »
I really can't think for the life of me why anyone here should be given grief for anything at-all, or why anyone should wish to waste their valuable time ie: life, here on earth dishing out such measures.  I have visited forums that seem to purposefully extrapolate this type of X factor psychology in what I consider to be a most disturbing display of bad character from all parties.

Why participate if it's not questioning, informative, or funny...?

If box isn't outright taking the piss here at times, which is the most likely scenario in my book, then he is in fact a bit challenged, or disturbed.  Does someone who is challenged or disturbed need grief Ethos?  And also...you talk about 'our' forum here...  Can I have a list of 'us', please, just so I'm in the know, like...?

Oh, and while your at it, sorry to put you on the spot, but who do reckon is more intelligent?  Alan?  Or Jeff?  :D
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #104 on: 06/02/2016 21:26:10 »
  Does someone who is challenged or disturbed need grief Ethos? 
Whether he is challenged or disturbed is beyond my reckoning. What he is however is mistaken and continues to insist he's not. If he wants to act like the only authority, he should be up to the criticism.

Quote from: timey
And also...you talk about 'our' forum here...  Can I have a list of 'us', please, just so I'm in the know, like...?
If you'll look at the top of the page, there is a section called "Members".

Quote from: timey
Oh, and while your at it, sorry to put you on the spot, but who do reckon is more intelligent?  Alan?  Or Jeff?  :D
I'll not fall into that trap timey, BTW both are much more intelligent than a few we have collected here lately.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #105 on: 06/02/2016 22:09:20 »
Well, I'll not disagree with you in relation to the criticism, but I must say I have a degree of curiosity as to what leads you to the desire to dish it out...

Ah yes... Top of page 'members', I'm somewhat relieved to find my name is there...oh, and lo and behold...so is Thebox...'s

What's 'trappy' about asking who you think is more intelligent?  It's entirely unlikely that either gives a hoot what you, or I, think.  I not sure that I've yet made up my mind personally.  Alan's more fun, that's for sure, and more experienced, don't need to be Einstein to work that one out.  Jeff is pretty sharp on his toes though, I'll give him that, and have never said otherwise...

Clearly you are referring to box as being one of the few who are less intelligent than both, but the fact of the word 'few' within the sentence indicates that you believe others are also less intelligent.  Can you tell me who these others are please?  It's just that I'm now making an assessment of your intelligence, and I'm quite sure I'll find that your own assessment of a persons intelligence will help me... ;)
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #106 on: 06/02/2016 22:30:14 »
  Can you tell me who these others are please?  It's just that I'm now making an assessment of your intelligence, and I'm quite sure I'll find that your own assessment of a persons intelligence will help me... ;)
I'll let you make up your own mind on that one my friend. Here is a key that will help you make the informed decision: Read through their posts, when you find contradictions and errors, their intelligence becomes quite evident.

And as far as your assessment of my intelligence, if I may be so blunt; The honest search for reality is more important than intelligence. One can be quite intelligent, but if they are dishonest enough to dismiss evidence offhand just to preserve their own vision of reality, they will never achieve any thing of significance. It takes both timey, intelligence and an honest assessment of experimental observation, whether those observations fit in neatly with ones biased predisposed positions or not.

 
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #107 on: 06/02/2016 23:08:24 »
Well we have all been busy discussing me and not discussing science, I take it , this assumption that I am stupid is the last resort for your own lack of understanding.

I do not have to justify myself to anybody, so all new theories or anybody who wishes to question present information and discourse that information is stupid hey?

Grow up....this is not a school yard.

What  rude and arrogant people, a good lesson to the young or anyone wishing to study science, just don't bother, because if you question anything, you will be insulted , if you have a new idea, they will claim it garbage.

May as well just read it on wiki, say nothing even when you know they are proper wrong.

So what do you think your right is to call people stupid ?

Because you can remember Wiki?

oh dear the hilariousness of this  people thinking they are clever because they have a good memory,









« Last Edit: 06/02/2016 23:17:20 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #108 on: 06/02/2016 23:33:29 »
I am unaware of any problem arising from the absence of a fixed background, that is not attributable to human vanity!

Then I propose that we agree to disagree. I do appreciate that you don't want readers to get the wrong impression of scientific theories from posts made by amateurs. This is a problem I also wish to avoid.
And this is the reason I appreciate you both Jeff. Both Alan and yourself are honest enough and studious enough to search out realities and defend the standard model against those who would disassemble it. While the standard model may need some tweaking, it is by far the best standard by which we judge natures realities.

Those who would do away with it completely are only interested in grandstanding and not the least interested in preserving the results from tested and tried experiment. These people represent the highest degree of selfishness common to man and should be confronted when they attempt to spread their garbage. Civil discussion is quite acceptable but for those whos agenda is only about spreading their point of view at the expense of everyone else, the burden of proof will fall upon them.
\
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4195
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #109 on: 06/02/2016 23:49:53 »
If anyone needs a definitive answer to a scientific question then Alan, Evan_au, ChiralSPO, Colin2B and others I may have forgotten will provide it. They are all prepared to stand corrected by others when they are shown to be wrong in their understanding. To effectively challenge mainstream ideas requires an understanding that you can't get from pop science books. Also adopting a user name based on a pet theory should sound alarm bells.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #110 on: 06/02/2016 23:50:30 »
There is a big difference in discussing somebodies idea, and ''preaching'' back present information.


There is nothing to be so defensive about, surely people can decide for themselves what they consider gibberish?


There is no need to keep quoting back time is this, or this is this, how many times must I tell these forums I can read and do have google search to look up these things.

The conversation would be rather boring in a new theory section if the theory was an old theory .

What is time ?

Time is blah, blah,

end of conversation


what sort of discussion would that be?   what sort of discussion would it be if I didn't apply any logical pressure about things and just said, ''yes sir, I accept that'' do I pass now?

Nobody seems to even know what a discussion is.

Nobody ever proves my idea wrong. So yes I am stuck trying until science proves me wrong on things.


Distance is an invariant yes?




*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #111 on: 06/02/2016 23:56:03 »


Nobody ever proves my idea wrong. So yes I am stuck trying until science proves me wrong on things.

It's not incumbent upon us to prove you wrong, the burden of proof lies squarely upon you Mr. Box. As yet, you have shown us nothing but poor math and "your logical" speculation.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #112 on: 07/02/2016 00:01:46 »


Nobody ever proves my idea wrong. So yes I am stuck trying until science proves me wrong on things.

It's not incumbent upon us to prove you wrong, the burden of proof lies squarely upon you Mr. Box. As yet, you have shown us nothing but poor math and "your logical" speculation.

Most of the time I ask direct question, I do not get a direct answer, mostly I am left confused why my questions are hard to answer.

Is distance an invariant, is a length of a distance invariant?

(notice no mass mentioned, no objects, no time, no light waves etc, so you can presume I mean space.)


I will draw a little diagram


d=0∞.......................L=A-----------------------B..............................0∞

My question in diagram form





« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 00:08:14 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #113 on: 07/02/2016 00:24:20 »

Is distance an invariant, is a length of a distance invariant?


You have stated time and time again that you don't believe in time dilation. And several members have answered you in the negative. And I believe the question of length contraction has already been answered as well.

If one views space and time as a single entity, as most scientists do, time dilation and length contraction are the standard view when considering the effect of near light speed upon the observed object. This has been pointed out to you many times so don't tell us we never answer your questions.

Space/time must be viewed as a continuum and trying to separate the two will not receive much consideration in scientific circles.

Caution Mr. Box, I'm at this point very unwilling to argue the point with you. You have my answer as well as many others. And you have constantly argued that we are wrong and you are right. Believe that if you must, but you're views are in the vast minority so convincing us of them falls squarely upon your shoulders. Problem is, you've already tried and have gotten little if any results. You have spent more time and bandwidth spelling out your position compared to the total contribution of other members so maybe it's time to give it a break.

As for myself, I'm tired of listening to your gibberish.

Over and OUT.................................
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 00:45:35 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #114 on: 07/02/2016 00:33:16 »


Does this mean that it is an act of human vanity to suppose that one might truly understand the universe as an entirety, and be able to chart the universe, as we do our earth, in full detail of knowledge, via a theory of everything?
Yes. But it's not a reason for not trying.

Quote
Because this is indeed what some, around 300, or so I've read, hardcore theoretical physicists are doing where quantum gravity is concerned.  By linking quantum to gravity, mass and gravitational field considerations would then indeed give both quantum and relativity an absolute reference frame from which to be equated.
Not quite the same thing as a fixed background through which all things move with absolute velocities.

Quote
Seems a reasonable enough quest to me Alan... You've surprise me with this comment really... I didn't think that you of all people would be paying any such blind homage to anything at all, let alone the 'church' of relativity....
Not a blind homage, but a realisation that with the successive abolition of anthrocentrism, geocentrism, heliocentrism and the universal aether, our theories have approximated ever closer to observation and our models of the universe have become ever simpler. If your goal is to provide the simplest, most selfconsistent and most accurately predictive hypothesis, it's probably a good idea to start from a relativist rather than an absolutist axiom. 
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #115 on: 07/02/2016 00:36:25 »
Is distance an invariant, is a length of a distance invariant?


This was answered way back on 29 January, Reply #1.
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4195
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #116 on: 07/02/2016 00:38:02 »
Imagine two large masses a distance S apart. Now remove those two objects. What is the value of S? Has it changed since the masses were removed? Does it even have the same meaning with no masses to reference?

If we consider that gravity is said to curve the spacetime more prominently around large masses then can we say S has in fact changed? For an object traveling along the path described by S, now as a vector, could we determine a difference with and without the masses present? We then need to consider frames of reference. Without the masses present these frames may or may not describe a flat spacetime.

Lastly we can consider minima and maxima. Particularly of length contraction. Where would you find the minimum or maximum length contraction within the universe? Are there multiple minima and maxima?

Now, Thebox, do not claim that this is what you meant all along. I won't stand for it.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 00:40:07 by jeffreyH »
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #117 on: 07/02/2016 00:39:51 »
If your goal is to provide the simplest, most selfconsistent and most accurately predictive hypothesis, it's probably a good idea to start from a relativist rather than an absolutist axiom.
Amen Alan...................

Woops, Mr. Box will probably accuse me of pushing religion because I wrote the word: "Amen"
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #118 on: 07/02/2016 04:35:41 »


Does this mean that it is an act of human vanity to suppose that one might truly understand the universe as an entirety, and be able to chart the universe, as we do our earth, in full detail of knowledge, via a theory of everything?
Yes. But it's not a reason for not trying.

Quote
Because this is indeed what some, around 300, or so I've read, hardcore theoretical physicists are doing where quantum gravity is concerned.  By linking quantum to gravity, mass and gravitational field considerations would then indeed give both quantum and relativity an absolute reference frame from which to be equated.
Not quite the same thing as a fixed background through which all things move with absolute velocities.

Quote
Seems a reasonable enough quest to me Alan... You've surprise me with this comment really... I didn't think that you of all people would be paying any such blind homage to anything at all, let alone the 'church' of relativity....
Not a blind homage, but a realisation that with the successive abolition of anthrocentrism, geocentrism, heliocentrism and the universal aether, our theories have approximated ever closer to observation and our models of the universe have become ever simpler. If your goal is to provide the simplest, most selfconsistent and most accurately predictive hypothesis, it's probably a good idea to start from a relativist rather than an absolutist axiom.

1) agreed
2) 'fixed background' not my choice of terminology,, but...och, trust a physicist to be pernickity
3)  nice use of wording there (chuckle), very subtle!  And yes, it is true that relativity and quantum would have to form the basis of any new theory, as these are our best working hypothesis.

BTW, Alan, it hasn't surprised me in the slightest that nobody has asked if I think I'm more intelligent than you or Jeff.  Considering the personal circumstances, no fault of your own I conclude, but I really hadn't expected any of you to make this realisation..  The fact that no one has just being further proof to myself of my superior intelligence. Lol, lol!  Righto - back to bed smartish would be smartish.
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2089
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #119 on: 07/02/2016 09:26:41 »
BTW, Alan, it hasn't surprised me in the slightest that nobody has asked if I think I'm more intelligent than you or Jeff. 
We were taking that as an axiom   [:)]



« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 09:30:13 by Colin2B »
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #120 on: 07/02/2016 09:44:20 »
Imagine two large masses a distance S apart. Now remove those two objects. What is the value of S? Has it changed since the masses were removed? Does it even have the same meaning with no masses to reference?



That part is what I have asked, I have this feeling you know what I am saying with my asking, I have this feeling you back down under pressure and dare not defend my idea in fear of ridicule.

Alan -'' This was answered way back on 29 January, Reply #1.''


In which you said there was no contraction of space distance or length.

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #121 on: 07/02/2016 10:03:15 »
Intelligence is best defined as the ability to surprise the observer - every other definition seems to reduce to an ability to deduce and follow rules devised by the observer, which is pretty much the antithesis of science.   

So far, I've been informed, amused and confused by a lot of what I have read in this forum, but the kiss of scientific approval ("Bloody hell, that's clever") has rarely passed my lips since reading Einstein on Relativity whilst listening to the Beatles. It was the use of Bbmajor instead of the expected minor in "I saw her standing there" that, like the opening augmented 7th in "Margie" a generation earlier, raised the entire oeuvre    from the quondam to the inspiriert. Of course one would never make the soi-tromperie of confusing sixth-form pretentiousness with  νοῦς.
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #122 on: 07/02/2016 10:05:20 »

Alan -'' This was answered way back on 29 January, Reply #1.''


In which you said there was no contraction of space distance or length.

No, I said

Quote
If you define b as being a fixed distance from a, then obviously [distance is invariant]. If you define b as being the other end of a stick, relativistic contraction will apply if the stick moves relative to an observer.

If you don't read the bloody answer, what's the point of asking the bloody question?
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 10:08:19 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #123 on: 07/02/2016 10:09:43 »

Alan -'' This was answered way back on 29 January, Reply #1.''


In which you said there was no contraction of space distance or length.

Relative to  the observer a stationary reference frame, an invariant, a constant.
The sum of all values = 0

∑=0

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #124 on: 07/02/2016 10:11:09 »

Alan -'' This was answered way back on 29 January, Reply #1.''


In which you said there was no contraction of space distance or length.

No, I said

Quote
If you define b as being a fixed distance from a, then obviously [distance is invariant]. If you define b as being the other end of a stick, relativistic contraction will apply if the stick moves relative to an observer.

If you don't read the bloody answer, what's the point of asking the bloody question?

I read the answer then tried to discuss the answer, then it got confusing because people said I was wrong etc, that is the impression I got,

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #125 on: 07/02/2016 10:13:27 »
So by length contraction you actually mean length compression of a moving body?

And in saying that a moving body must also have a height expansion/decompression?


L=x

x+v=<x

<x=>y

So in vacuum a spring travels at the near speed of light, what force makes the spring compress?  acceleration?  can't be speed
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 10:24:27 by Thebox »

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2089
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #126 on: 07/02/2016 11:32:20 »
So by length contraction you actually mean length compression of a moving body?
No, it is called length contraction so it doesnt get confused with compression. Compression implies pressure or pushing inwards. This is space changing, imagine a stretched rubber band, draw a line on it, now let the band contract and the line is shorter. Gravity and speed affect the stretch of spacetime.
And in saying that a moving body must also have a height expansion/decompression?
No, just length in the direction of movement.

So in vacuum a spring travels at the near speed of light, what force makes the spring compress?  acceleration?  can't be speed
Explain why it can't be speed.
Remember there is no force compressing the spring
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #127 on: 07/02/2016 11:52:41 »
As Colin says, contraction, as observed by a second party moving relative to the stick, not compression, which would be observed by a traveller on the stick.

You can avoid a lot of confusion by using the same words as everyone else.
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #128 on: 07/02/2016 11:59:33 »
As Colin says, contraction, as observed by a second party moving relative to the stick, not compression, which would be observed by a traveller on the stick.

You can avoid a lot of confusion by using the same words as everyone else.

So let me get this right, space-time you really mean light?

length contraction you are on about the angles of an object relative to light?

[attachment=20919]




You  mean light contracts relative to the observer?
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 12:06:59 by Thebox »

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2089
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #129 on: 07/02/2016 14:41:14 »
So let me get this right, space-time you really mean light?
No, we said spacetime we meant spacetime, not light
length contraction you are on about the angles of an object relative to light?

You  mean light contracts relative to the observer?
No, light remains the same speed for all observers when we consider movement in special relativity.
We are not talking about the angles of light relative to an object, but sometimes that can be used as an analogy.
Reread what I wrote first about the stretching of spacetime.

and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #130 on: 07/02/2016 14:53:57 »
So let me get this right, space-time you really mean light?
No, we said spacetime we meant spacetime, not light
length contraction you are on about the angles of an object relative to light?

You  mean light contracts relative to the observer?
No, light remains the same speed for all observers when we consider movement in special relativity.
We are not talking about the angles of light relative to an object, but sometimes that can be used as an analogy.
Reread what I wrote first about the stretching of spacetime.

Huh?  now I am back to square one, what do you mean by ''This is space changing'',  ?


How exactly can space change when space is not made of anything ?  What are you suggesting changes?

There is no proven ether, there is no solidity, the values are zero, so how can zero change?


*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #131 on: 07/02/2016 15:10:37 »


There is no proven ether, there is no solidity, the values are zero, so how can zero change?
Think for a moment about what you just said; "there is no solidity". This example is not the reason for length contraction but may help you understand how it could happen.
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 15:13:23 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2089
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #132 on: 07/02/2016 15:12:29 »
space is not made of anything ....... the values are zero, so how can zero change?
please prove this

And also you didnt answer my queston

Explain why it can't be speed
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4914
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #133 on: 07/02/2016 16:23:00 »
So let me get this right, space-time you really mean light?

No. If I had meant light, I would have written light. And I haven't mentioned space-time at all.

Just read the words on the bloody card!
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #134 on: 07/02/2016 19:08:45 »
So let me get this right, space-time you really mean light?

No. If I had meant light, I would have written light. And I haven't mentioned space-time at all.

Just read the words on the bloody card!

My apologies, it was Colin who mentioned stretching of space-time.


As Colin says, contraction, as observed by a second party moving relative to the stick, not compression, which would be observed by a traveller on the stick.

You can avoid a lot of confusion by using the same words as everyone else.
I have read this about 3 times and still observe no contraction.

Let us use a surfer on a surfboard surfing in space, and parallel to the surfer is another surfer travelling the same speed and direction.


s1→→→→→

s2→→→→→


So what am I looking at in this scenario that contracts?

a. the length of the surf board?

b. the distance?







« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 19:11:18 by Thebox »

*

Online jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4195
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #135 on: 07/02/2016 19:44:46 »

No, I said

Quote
If you define b as being a fixed distance from a, then obviously [distance is invariant]. If you define b as being the other end of a stick, relativistic contraction will apply if the stick moves relative to an observer.

If you don't read the bloody answer, what's the point of asking the bloody question?

Thebox please read Alan's answer above through as many times as necessary. It tells you ALL you need to know. You can even come back and ask questions if it is not exactly clear. There is a subtle distinction in what Alan has said that you might miss.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #136 on: 07/02/2016 19:58:48 »

No, I said

Quote
If you define b as being a fixed distance from a, then obviously [distance is invariant]. If you define b as being the other end of a stick, relativistic contraction will apply if the stick moves relative to an observer.

If you don't read the bloody answer, what's the point of asking the bloody question?

Thebox please read Alan's answer above through as many times as necessary. It tells you ALL you need to know. You can even come back and ask questions if it is not exactly clear. There is a subtle distinction in what Alan has said that you might miss.

Yes I have read that too, several times now, it sounds like Alan is saying space is an invariant but a stick if it moves shrinks in length.


Without an opposing force to the direction of the stick I do not see how this is possible.   

Where can I view the observation evidence of this?

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #137 on: 07/02/2016 20:22:38 »
Yes Space Flow, (chuckle)  I truly know the feeling!  Have you read 'The Trouble with Physics' Lee Smolin?
No I have not read his book and to tell you the truth I have no intention to.
I 110% agree with his views and basically have learned to avoid the subjects of "String theory", "M theory", "God", Multiverse, or any other religion you want to name.
There is a definition of what can be classed as a theory within the confines of the scientific method and none of those qualify.
Therefore I have no interest in reading or hearing any more about them.
If your idea can not make a testable prediction, it is not a "scientific" theory.
At best it is a hypothesis.

I don't know why you wouldn't be interested in Lee Smolin's book.  It basically echoes your sentiments here exactly, and illustrates each part of everything within physics that does not match up.

Hope all went well with surgeon.
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #138 on: 07/02/2016 20:28:11 »
  Can you tell me who these others are please?  It's just that I'm now making an assessment of your intelligence, and I'm quite sure I'll find that your own assessment of a persons intelligence will help me... ;)
I'll let you make up your own mind on that one my friend. Here is a key that will help you make the informed decision: Read through their posts, when you find contradictions and errors, their intelligence becomes quite evident.

And as far as your assessment of my intelligence, if I may be so blunt; The honest search for reality is more important than intelligence. One can be quite intelligent, but if they are dishonest enough to dismiss evidence offhand just to preserve their own vision of reality, they will never achieve any thing of significance. It takes both timey, intelligence and an honest assessment of experimental observation, whether those observations fit in neatly with ones biased predisposed positions or not.

Ah... Hmmmm, OK, Lol,  I can see that I might have to start reading your posts...

(Don't mind me too much, just having myself a mild troll)
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #139 on: 07/02/2016 20:33:49 »
BTW, Alan, it hasn't surprised me in the slightest that nobody has asked if I think I'm more intelligent than you or Jeff. 
We were taking that as an axiom   [:)]

Oh, goodly, good Colin, I'm sooooo glad that I'm a member!  ...But could we please make that an 'absolute axiom'?  S'got a better ring to it!

But...even though I hesitate to over complicate the matter, in the interests of honesty I fear it must be done!  So...having established the fact that 'we' think that I think I am more intelligent than both Alan and Jeff - on the basis that because I come from a socially outer space non schooled and self taught perspective, I have come from a place where I bring no absolute meter stick with which you may measure us against each other...therefore perhaps my intelligence cannot be considered an invariant and 'is' actually relative.

Congrats on becoming a moderator, btw!  It's cleared something up for me, as I was wondering if the mods got a cut on all this new advertising on the forum, but I think it pretty much goes without saying that the inclusion of a fresh one at this point rules this thought out... (chuckle)
Now I was thinking of mentioning that I remember a post where Alan said he used to be a trade unionist, but it occurs that I might need to ask Chris a favour one of these days, so I'll just stick a sock in it :D
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #140 on: 07/02/2016 20:41:18 »
It is a weird one box, relativity explains length contraction mathematically, but offers no reasonable explanation as to the causation of this phenomenon.

Therefore, actually, the way is clear for a speculation... I personally speculate that because the rate of time for the contracted length is slowed via its velocity, an observer is viewing the length moving in a slower rate of time relative to their own.  An observer viewing an event from their faster rate of time, will not have 'the time' in which to view the entirety of the length as it moves within it's slower rate of time, causing the length to appear contracted to the observer.

However, a length and a distance are 2 different things.  A length is a measurement of matter, and a distance is a measurement of space. The stretching of the fabric of outer space also affects distances according to GR.

It is true that science has had the benefit of many great minds, but on the other hand, logically speaking, it is in fact an act of sheer stupidity to consider our knowledge of the universe as wise...  Our 2 best working theories cannot be fully united.  If they could, discussions such as this would be redundant...

Well yes, normally when there is a piece of maths it suppose to represent something physically observed. I observe no contraction personally so it is a bit fairy tale like.

This being, box, because space time within our macro environment is only distorted to a very, very small fraction, of a fraction, of a second.

I think, after much reflection, that the answer to your question under the remit of established physics is:

"Is distance an invariant?"

 ... yes, and, no!
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #141 on: 07/02/2016 21:02:05 »
If anyone needs a definitive answer to a scientific question then Alan, Evan_au, ChiralSPO, Colin2B and others I may have forgotten will provide it. They are all prepared to stand corrected by others when they are shown to be wrong in their understanding. To effectively challenge mainstream ideas requires an understanding that you can't get from pop science books. Also adopting a user name based on a pet theory should sound alarm bells.

An understanding of the universe cannot be attained by a school education either, no matter how much your parents paid, and paid for or not, a school education is no guarantee of a persons personal intellect.

A full understanding of the universe is yet to exist.

P.S.  I hadn't realised Thebox... had a theory called Thebox...  I'll have to do a search, aye :D
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #142 on: 07/02/2016 21:18:08 »
If anyone needs a definitive answer to a scientific question then Alan, Evan_au, ChiralSPO, Colin2B and others I may have forgotten will provide it. They are all prepared to stand corrected by others when they are shown to be wrong in their understanding. To effectively challenge mainstream ideas requires an understanding that you can't get from pop science books. Also adopting a user name based on a pet theory should sound alarm bells.

An understanding of the universe cannot be attained by a school education either, no matter how much your parents paid, and paid for or not, a school education is no guarantee of a persons personal intellect.

A full understanding of the universe is yet to exist.

P.S.  I hadn't realised Thebox... had a theory called Thebox...  I'll have to do a search, aye :D

I have not got a theory called the box.

*

Online Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3258
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #143 on: 07/02/2016 21:19:20 »
It is a weird one box, relativity explains length contraction mathematically, but offers no reasonable explanation as to the causation of this phenomenon.

Therefore, actually, the way is clear for a speculation... I personally speculate that because the rate of time for the contracted length is slowed via its velocity, an observer is viewing the length moving in a slower rate of time relative to their own.  An observer viewing an event from their faster rate of time, will not have 'the time' in which to view the entirety of the length as it moves within it's slower rate of time, causing the length to appear contracted to the observer.

However, a length and a distance are 2 different things.  A length is a measurement of matter, and a distance is a measurement of space. The stretching of the fabric of outer space also affects distances according to GR.

It is true that science has had the benefit of many great minds, but on the other hand, logically speaking, it is in fact an act of sheer stupidity to consider our knowledge of the universe as wise...  Our 2 best working theories cannot be fully united.  If they could, discussions such as this would be redundant...

Well yes, normally when there is a piece of maths it suppose to represent something physically observed. I observe no contraction personally so it is a bit fairy tale like.

This being, box, because space time within our macro environment is only distorted to a very, very small fraction, of a fraction, of a second.

I think, after much reflection, that the answer to your question under the remit of established physics is:

"Is distance an invariant?"

 ... yes, and, no!

You should realise now you please need to explain why no?


*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #144 on: 07/02/2016 21:28:23 »


Ah... Hmmmm, OK, Lol,  I can see that I might have to start reading your posts...

(Don't mind me too much, just having myself a mild troll)
Be my guest timey, I'm sure you'll find a few contradictions and errors along the way. Like many people searching for the truth, I've had to change my mind several times when confronted with evidence. It's called "growth", something a few of us have resisted since their initial membership began.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #145 on: 07/02/2016 22:16:58 »
If anyone needs a definitive answer to a scientific question then Alan, Evan_au, ChiralSPO, Colin2B and others I may have forgotten will provide it. They are all prepared to stand corrected by others when they are shown to be wrong in their understanding. To effectively challenge mainstream ideas requires an understanding that you can't get from pop science books. Also adopting a user name based on a pet theory should sound alarm bells.

An understanding of the universe cannot be attained by a school education either, no matter how much your parents paid, and paid for or not, a school education is no guarantee of a persons personal intellect.

A full understanding of the universe is yet to exist.

P.S.  I hadn't realised Thebox... had a theory called Thebox...  I'll have to do a search, aye :D

I have not got a theory called the box.

Aww, how cute is that?

Tbh, box, I did in fact already know this.  Try thinking it through a little bit further... :)
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #146 on: 07/02/2016 22:19:51 »


Ah... Hmmmm, OK, Lol,  I can see that I might have to start reading your posts...

(Don't mind me too much, just having myself a mild troll)
Be my guest timey, I'm sure you'll find a few contradictions and errors along the way. Like many people searching for the truth, I've had to change my mind several times when confronted with evidence. It's called "growth", something a few of us have resisted since their initial membership began.

Thanks, I will.  And speaking for myself, I'm all up for growth, progression, and a good measure of humour wherever possible.
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #147 on: 07/02/2016 22:27:09 »

You should realise now you please need to explain why no?

Really, do I have to?  Cos' from what I've seen everyone has had a go at explaining that a length contracts for an observer, that a distance contracts for a traveller, and that space time stretches distance.

Can't I explain why distance is an invariant instead?  It's the only angle that hadn't been so thoroughly covered!
« Last Edit: 07/02/2016 23:07:37 by timey »
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2089
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #148 on: 07/02/2016 22:52:14 »
Can't I explain why distance is an invariant instead? 
No, because the question is "is distance an absolute invariant"

The floor is your's.
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1575
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #149 on: 07/02/2016 23:12:46 »
Can't I explain why distance is an invariant instead? 
No, because the question is "is distance an absolute invariant"

The floor is your's.

Check out the brain on Colin here, lol, lol, lol!!!

Now then box, the answer to your question:

Is distance an 'absolute' invariant?


Is: As set out by established physics.  No!

If you ask me 'why' now, I'm going to scream!!!

Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...