Is distance an absolute invariant?

  • 297 Replies
  • 17367 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #150 on: 08/02/2016 00:18:26 »


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!!!
Simple and concise answer my man, Mr. Box should appreciate that a great deal even though this has been the umpteenth time that question has been answered.

If Mr. Box wants an answer to why we know this, let it suffice to say: "Because that result is what relativistic math and experiment reveal."

Now as to the singular question "why"; Maybe a similar answer as to; "why does a dog circle itself twice before setting down?"

Only the dog knows for sure!
« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 00:21:03 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #151 on: 08/02/2016 10:19:17 »


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!!!
Simple and concise answer my man, Mr. Box should appreciate that a great deal even though this has been the umpteenth time that question has been answered.

If Mr. Box wants an answer to why we know this, let it suffice to say: "Because that result is what relativistic math and experiment reveal."

Now as to the singular question "why"; Maybe a similar answer as to; "why does a dog circle itself twice before setting down?"

Only the dog knows for sure!

What experiment shows a length contraction, I do not believe this experiment exists?


*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #152 on: 08/02/2016 10:22:22 »
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... :)

Well I did think further and google the box theory to find a facebook page, green box, red box, yellow box, nothing I have not said in the past in a different way.

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #153 on: 08/02/2016 14:46:38 »
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... :)

Well I did think further and google the box theory to find a facebook page, green box, red box, yellow box, nothing I have not said in the past in a different way.

Box, :). I am the one with the time theory and the user name timey, OK?
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #154 on: 08/02/2016 14:48:06 »
Meanwhile...  in a much long forgotten relics room, at an as yet to be disclosed museum somewhere... geologists have been called in to conduct carbon dating of the stratum of dust layers obscuring the contours of an artefact that scientists, and historians alike, are now convinced might just be Occam's Razor...
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #155 on: 08/02/2016 15:13:02 »


What experiment shows a length contraction, I do not believe this experiment exists?
There have been several experiments that suggest verification for length contraction at near light speed. One such experiment using heavy ions has shown that the increase in nucleon density do to length contraction is the most logical conclusion. Heavy ions are spherical at rest but assume a flattened or pancake like shape at near light speeds. This experiment has been observed and verified at cyclotrons, commonly referred to as atom smashers.

Maybe you should start looking up the material for yourself, the web or a good physics weekly would be a good start.
« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 15:15:41 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #156 on: 08/02/2016 15:15:39 »


Box, :). I am the one with the time theory and the user name timey, OK?

Sorry you lost me, what time theory?

are you the time cube guy?



« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 15:19:48 by Thebox »

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #157 on: 08/02/2016 15:19:17 »


What experiment shows a length contraction, I do not believe this experiment exists?
There have been several experiments that suggest verification for length contraction at near light speed. One such experiment using heavy ions has shown that the increase in nucleon density do to length contraction is the most logical conclusion. Heavy ions are spherical at rest but assume a flattened or pancake like shape at near light speeds. This experiment has been observed and verified at cyclotrons, commonly referred to as atom smashers.

Maybe you should start looking up the material for yourself, the web or a good physics weekly would be a good start.

huh?  I have no idea what you just said, what on Earth is an heavy ion suppose to be? 

I looked it up, how does charged particles grouping while travelling through  collider prove contraction of a stick?


« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 15:24:18 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #158 on: 08/02/2016 15:39:33 »


huh?  I have no idea what you just said, what on Earth is an heavy ion suppose to be?
Look it up, you have shown no interest in what any of us have offered you freely to date. Unless you're willing to learn from reputable sources like most of the members here at TNS frequent, how can you honestly expect to learn or form accurate views about current scientific information?

How are you ever going to learn anything Mr. Box if you won't trust the professionals that have the equipment and knowledge to preform these experiments? I'm sure you don't have a cyclotron at your residence and neither do any of us. We get our information from the facilities that do.

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

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #159 on: 08/02/2016 15:50:46 »


huh?  I have no idea what you just said, what on Earth is an heavy ion suppose to be?
Look it up, you have shown no interest in what any of us have offered you freely to date. Unless you're willing to learn from reputable sources like most of the members here at TNS frequent, how can you honestly expect to learn or form accurate views about current scientific information?

How are you ever going to learn anything Mr. Box if you won't trust the professionals that have the equipment and knowledge to preform these experiments? I'm sure you don't have a cyclotron at your residence and neither do any of us. We get our information from the facilities that do.

I do not know the exact details of the experiment, therefore I hold judgement, I have not observed the experimental procedure and method to discourse and look for human error or observer effect.

It is not that I don't ''trust'', I do not take things at face value.   The title of a book tells what the story is about, only if you read the full book doe's one know the full story.

In my question I do not ask about any of your book, I ask about something that I observe. I observe space itself without radiation or mass is an empty void, I observe there is no concrete existence such as an ether, I observe that for something to stretch, bend, contract, expand, it has to me made of something and have elastic or flexible properties. I do not observe objects of solidity in motion contracting in length. I do observe objects in rotation contacting in height and expanding in length.

The Earth and empty space of  a vacuum testament to the statement above's truthfulness.

How could the Earth's circumference at the equator ever contract when the expansion is caused by rotation velocity?


If the rotation slowed down there would be a diameter length contraction or circumference contraction if you like, but how can relative velocity of orbit contract a length?


How can the nothing of space contract ?






« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 16:02:37 by Thebox »

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #160 on: 08/02/2016 16:42:06 »


Box, :). I am the one with the time theory and the user name timey, OK?

Sorry you lost me, what time theory?

are you the time cube guy?

G,grief!  Ok, look...Jeff said, amongst other implications, that a user who's basis of theory is reflected in a pet user name should sound alarm bells... I illustrated that it was not you he is side swiping with that comment, as you do not have a box theory!  Reason why I illustrated this fact is because it was me who he was having a sideways dig at.  Do you get it now?

No... I'm not the time cube guy, I'm the inverted time theory woman.
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #161 on: 08/02/2016 16:50:06 »


Box, :). I am the one with the time theory and the user name timey, OK?

Sorry you lost me, what time theory?

are you the time cube guy?

G,grief!  Ok, look...Jeff said, amongst other implications, that a user who's basis of theory is reflected in a pet user name should sound alarm bells... I illustrated that it was not you he is side swiping with that comment, as you do not have a box theory!  Reason why I illustrated this fact is because it was me who he was having a sideways dig at.  Do you get it now?

No... I'm not the time cube guy, I'm the inverted time theory woman.

Arghh yes I get it now , my mistake sorry. Pleased to meet you inverted time theory lady.  Are you the same person who has made a new time theory but have not quite published the article yet?

A theory something to do with mirrored time running backwards in a parallel universe?

arrows of time ?


added - I found your thread , that must of been time consuming, how exactly does 0 invert?


« Last Edit: 08/02/2016 17:31:05 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #162 on: 08/02/2016 17:57:06 »


I do not know the exact details of the experiment, therefore I hold judgement, I have not observed the experimental procedure and method to discourse and look for human error or observer effect.
Evidently then, you have only one recourse Mr. Box, purchase your own collider and preform the experiment yourself. Then, which I totally doubt, you'll be able to argue with the professionals at places like CERN. You somehow think you're arguing with us here at TNS when in reality, it is those accomplished scientists at places like CERN that you have your disagreement with. Now really, why should we trust you instead of them when you don't even know what a heavy ion is?

Believe what you wish sir, I'm done offering you examples in an effort to help you grow.

« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 15:54:39 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #163 on: 08/02/2016 18:52:58 »
added - I found your thread , that must of been time consuming, how exactly does 0 invert?

Well, what-da-ya-know!!!  Look at that will ya!!!

Cuts straight to the chase or what?

Truth is box, that's about the only one tiny part of my whole theory that I cannot quite get a visual on.  In my defence, the theory does take the universe all the way back to zero, no other theory does this, but I cannot get a precise mechanism for inverting nothing into something...  Not even the tinsiest, tiniest of somethings...  Not yet anyway!
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #164 on: 08/02/2016 19:46:16 »
added - I found your thread , that must of been time consuming, how exactly does 0 invert?

Well, what-da-ya-know!!!  Look at that will ya!!!

Cuts straight to the chase or what?

Truth is box, that's about the only one tiny part of my whole theory that I cannot quite get a visual on.  In my defence, the theory does take the universe all the way back to zero, no other theory does this, but I cannot get a precise mechanism for inverting nothing into something...  Not even the tinsiest, tiniest of somethings...  Not yet anyway!

Your theory needs to take the Universe back to 0 but also it needs to take the universe forward to 0∞.

Applicable from any reference point.

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #165 on: 08/02/2016 19:55:08 »
Well box, the implications of a cyclic universe that increases in size each cycle does indeed extend to infinity, and does describe the universe from any reference point...  I know...I know... It's a bloody long read ;)
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #166 on: 08/02/2016 20:01:02 »
Well box, the implications of a cyclic universe that increases in size each cycle does indeed extend to infinity, and does describe the universe from any reference point...  I know...I know... It's a bloody long read ;)

Don't fall into trap of thinking shapes or cycle's just think infinite in any direction from any point, and not think space is expanding or has shape, red-shift is light reflecting from matter, space does not reflect light.

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #167 on: 08/02/2016 20:17:11 »
LOL!  Got to hand it to ya!  Indeed... space does not reflect light!

So, you're all sorted then?  Questions answered to satisfaction?  Time dilation does exist, and both lengths and distances subsequently distort?
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #168 on: 08/02/2016 20:27:56 »
LOL!  Got to hand it to ya!  Indeed... space does not reflect light!

So, you're all sorted then?  Questions answered to satisfaction?  Time dilation does exist, and both lengths and distances subsequently distort?

No time dilation exists but does not exist, lengths of space do not contract but objects and energies  might contract.


*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #169 on: 08/02/2016 20:53:25 »
I daresay the answer must lie within, grasshopper... :)
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2079
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #170 on: 08/02/2016 22:32:40 »
I do not know the exact details of the experiment, therefore I hold judgement, I have not observed the experimental procedure and method to discourse and look for human error or observer effect.
Then why don't you take the trouble to find and read the details.
I agree with Ethos, little point in discussing things with you if you can't be bothered to make the effort.
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #171 on: 09/02/2016 00:22:49 »
I do not know the exact details of the experiment, therefore I hold judgement, I have not observed the experimental procedure and method to discourse and look for human error or observer effect.
Then why don't you take the trouble to find and read the details.
I agree with Ethos, little point in discussing things with you if you can't be bothered to make the effort.
I have spent time looking to find nothing , I found a few things on testing light but nothing to with testing lengths.   Also I now have some thoughts on distance contraction,  does a telescope contract distance visually?

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4896
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #172 on: 09/02/2016 06:47:50 »

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.


If I had meant that , I would have said it. I meant exactly what I said, nothing more, nothing less.

Quote
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?

Since they are not moving relative to each other, each sees the other's board as the same length as his own. Which is exactly what I wrote in the first place: contraction is only observed if the stick moves relative to the observer.

Nature is too dumb to cheat: physics only gets complicated if you add unnecessary complications and pointless preconceptions.
« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 06:56:16 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2079
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #173 on: 09/02/2016 07:11:20 »
I have spent time looking to find nothing , I found a few things on testing light but nothing to with testing lengths.   
Ethos found it, you didn't look hard enough. Sounds like you are forming your own religion and ignoring contrary evidence.
Follow up Ethos's suggestion and read the experiment.
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #174 on: 09/02/2016 10:13:55 »
I have spent time looking to find nothing , I found a few things on testing light but nothing to with testing lengths.   
Ethos found it, you didn't look hard enough. Sounds like you are forming your own religion and ignoring contrary evidence.
Follow up Ethos's suggestion and read the experiment.

How am I ignoring when I am searching for it?

I can't find it, I can find plenty of stuff that says length contraction can not be tested and has never been tested.

Looks like another parlour trick to me using light.

[attachment=20927]

And I have seen some  demo's using plus and neg, the distance does not change just the pattern in these type examples.




« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 10:26:23 by Thebox »

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #175 on: 09/02/2016 10:41:11 »
Parlour tricks

[attachment=20929]

XYZ is not different directions, XYZ is actually 4/3 pi X

X=Y=Z=t0

Golden rule 1 - Relative to our consciousness, there is 0t and 0d to ourselves.



Everything  else is relative to this fundamental principle.


Golden rule 2 - Our consciousness expands relative to light magnitude, light magnitude relative to the simultaneous observation of distance. (needs improvement)


Golden rule 3 - Our consciousness is the fastest thing that exists, faster than light(needs improvement)




« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 10:56:16 by Thebox »

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2079
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #176 on: 09/02/2016 11:16:14 »
XYZ is not different directions, XYZ is actually 4/3 pi X

X=Y=Z=t0

Golden rule 1 - Relative to our consciousness, there is 0t and 0d to ourselves.



Everything  else is relative to this fundamental principle.


Golden rule 2 - Our consciousness expands relative to light magnitude, light magnitude relative to the simultaneous observation of distance. (needs improvement)


Golden rule 3 - Our consciousness is the fastest thing that exists, faster than light(needs improvement)
I was going to give you a few references and engage in sensible discussion, but I see you are just interested in going down another rabbit hole.
Discussion is pointless. I can see you are not really interested.
I'm out.

PS consciousness is actually quite slow and nowhere near light speed.
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #177 on: 09/02/2016 13:05:31 »

PS consciousness is actually quite slow and nowhere near light speed.

Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?



*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #178 on: 09/02/2016 13:37:21 »
Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?

Interesting theory. I believe consciousness is affected by spacetime. However, the power of imagination may create the illusion of the observer, as the speed of consciousness cannot be measured quantitatively.
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #179 on: 09/02/2016 15:26:06 »


Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?
That statement is, without question, the most "unenlightened" response I have ever seen posted on this forum. I felt the need to post a quote for posterities sake out of fear the author might realize the shear ineptitude of it and edit it out before someone else was able to view it. 

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

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #180 on: 09/02/2016 18:22:57 »


Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?
That statement is, without question, the most "unenlightened" response I have ever seen posted on this forum. I felt the need to post a quote for posterities sake out of fear the author might realize the shear ineptitude of it and edit it out before someone else was able to view it. 

Just saying...............................................
  You are welcome to say, I can only presume you read it wrongly. Are you suggesting we do not see light leaving/interacting at the surface of the object at the same time we receive light to our eyes?


Are you contesting the constant-'constant?

Are you contesting observation of distant red-shift?

May I remind of the axiom

Part One - Understanding the constant-'constant of light propagating through space.

Light in a vacuum travels at 299 792 458 m / s and is a constant.   Space  is a near perfect vacuum and is ''transparent'' to light, meaning that space allows light to propagate through space unchanging in the constant speed.  Ourselves,  observe a clarity of space in that relatively we can observe distant objects reflecting light and the space between ourselves and the observed object  is not opaque, it is relatively ''see through''.  This observation is relatively constant to all visual observers in any frame of reference that is not in shadow/night.





« Last Edit: 09/02/2016 18:25:36 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #181 on: 09/02/2016 18:44:16 »


Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?
You can't "consciously observe a distant planet" unless the light from that planet reaches your eye. To claim that; "I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?" is bogus and I'm confident that you are smart enough to know that. Why you would make such a claim is beyond reason Mr. Box!

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

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #182 on: 09/02/2016 19:01:13 »


Really ? if consciousness is slower than light , then how come I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?
You can't "consciously observe a distant planet" unless the light from that planet reaches your eye. To claim that; "I can consciously observe a distant planet before the light even arrives at my eyes?" is bogus and I'm confident that you are smart enough to know that. Why you would make such a claim is beyond reason Mr. Box!

consciousness
ˈkɒnʃəsnɪs/Submit

''unless the light from that planet reaches your eye.''


Unless your eye is within the reach ,

are you saying you do not perceive distance?

added - are you saying that light   magnitude and radius in conjunction with the inverse square law does not affect visual distance of the observer?






« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 09:28:49 by Thebox »

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #183 on: 09/02/2016 19:19:55 »


are you saying you do not perceive distance?
What I perceive Mr. Box, is you going in circles like that proverbial dog I spoke of earlier. Always going in circles before he finally sits down. Eventually, when it finally comes to you, you may take a needed rest and sit down for a while.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #184 on: 09/02/2016 22:34:20 »


are you saying you do not perceive distance?
What I perceive Mr. Box, is you going in circles like that proverbial dog I spoke of earlier. Always going in circles before he finally sits down. Eventually, when it finally comes to you, you may take a needed rest and sit down for a while.
What i perceive is you side stepping a direct question again.


I ask again, are you saying you do not observe distance ?


added - are you saying that light   magnitude and radius in conjunction with the inverse square law does not affect visual distance of the observer?
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 09:30:01 by Thebox »

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #185 on: 10/02/2016 00:25:23 »
Box, this is a very simple visual experiment that you can conduct yourself, presuming you have access to a railway station...

But.. before I start, I want to make it absolutely clear that the visual result of this experiment is NOT a length contraction.  So... so long as we are clear on that...

Ok, stand on the right hand side end of a railway platform, as far away from the edge as you are able, or up to about 20 ft or so, and fix your vision directly across the track upon the platform opposite.  It is important that your vision remain fixed to this spot.  As a train pulls into the station, you will see the trains carriages zipping past your fixed position of vision.  You will notice that the train has carriages because of the gaps between the carriages.  As the train reduces in speed, from your visually fixed position, you will notice that the train carriages appear to be getting longer, and longer, until the train comes to a stop.

Now then box, because you are also interested in time, but let me be very clear, this is NOT an example of time dilation...  I suggest you quickly run to the left hand end of the platform and assume the visually fixed position of fixing your vision directly across at the opposite platform.  As the train leaves the station, start counting as soon as you see the front end of a carriage go past... one, one thousand, two, one thousand, and so on, until the end of the carriage passes your vision.  Then start counting from one again when the front of the next carriage passes your vision, and so on.  As the train picks up speed leaving the railway station, you will notice that the carriages takes less and less 'time' to pass you, as well as looking shorter.

Although both of these examples are NOT relativistic effects, they are about as close a representation that you will find as a visual experience in earth's reference frame.
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #186 on: 10/02/2016 07:44:47 »
Box, this is a very simple visual experiment that you can conduct yourself, presuming you have access to a railway station...

But.. before I start, I want to make it absolutely clear that the visual result of this experiment is NOT a length contraction.  So... so long as we are clear on that...

Ok, stand on the right hand side end of a railway platform, as far away from the edge as you are able, or up to about 20 ft or so, and fix your vision directly across the track upon the platform opposite.  It is important that your vision remain fixed to this spot.  As a train pulls into the station, you will see the trains carriages zipping past your fixed position of vision.  You will notice that the train has carriages because of the gaps between the carriages.  As the train reduces in speed, from your visually fixed position, you will notice that the train carriages appear to be getting longer, and longer, until the train comes to a stop.

Now then box, because you are also interested in time, but let me be very clear, this is NOT an example of time dilation...  I suggest you quickly run to the left hand end of the platform and assume the visually fixed position of fixing your vision directly across at the opposite platform.  As the train leaves the station, start counting as soon as you see the front end of a carriage go past... one, one thousand, two, one thousand, and so on, until the end of the carriage passes your vision.  Then start counting from one again when the front of the next carriage passes your vision, and so on.  As the train picks up speed leaving the railway station, you will notice that the carriages takes less and less 'time' to pass you, as well as looking shorter.

Although both of these examples are NOT relativistic effects, they are about as close a representation that you will find as a visual experience in earth's reference frame.

Well you  have just explained acceleration and deceleration in a very complex way. Why on Earth would anyone add anything to the scenario you just said.   No length contraction, just acceleration and deceleration. I think science tries to make mountains out of mole hills.


p.s do the same train observation when the train is travelling a constant speed, you will observe no difference, just like light propagating through space.

I understand relativity now, it is parlour tricks , I may write a theory of realistic.

Cause aeroplanes accelerate to take off see, and while things accelerate gravity is not constant see, satellites have to be accelerated once in a while see?


If only I could accelerate faster than the speed of time , I could cover  distance in no time.







« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 09:43:30 by Thebox »

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #187 on: 10/02/2016 14:30:25 »
Ah box... now we are getting somewhere, because yes I am describing acceleration, and you are correct in your notions of a constant speed... at least :) .

By switching the polarities and keeping the speed of the train at a constant speed, let's say 3mph... and counting off one, one thousand, 2 one thousand, and so on, from front of carriages to back of carriages at faster or slower 'rates', then the possibility of a length contraction/expansion effect will become apparent to you, in consideration of the trains constant speed.

If you can grasp this concept, then you are further along your path of understanding relativity.

As to the rest, I'll leave you there, and seriously, I wish you well in your further explorations of physics...

All the best!
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #188 on: 10/02/2016 17:02:46 »
Ah box... now we are getting somewhere, because yes I am describing acceleration, and you are correct in your notions of a constant speed... at least :) .

By switching the polarities and keeping the speed of the train at a constant speed, let's say 3mph... and counting off one, one thousand, 2 one thousand, and so on, from front of carriages to back of carriages at faster or slower 'rates', then the possibility of a length contraction/expansion effect will become apparent to you, in consideration of the trains constant speed.

If you can grasp this concept, then you are further along your path of understanding relativity.

As to the rest, I'll leave you there, and seriously, I wish you well in your further explorations of physics...

All the best!


I understood length contraction in the first place, a meaningless parlour trick, relative to the object, the object does not contract it just appears to contract to the observation.  It is relatively really poor science or poor definition. I would call it an observation contraction due to the relative velocity of the observed.



« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 17:06:25 by Thebox »

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4896
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #189 on: 10/02/2016 17:49:54 »
You have taken the first step towards understanding relativity, and indeed towards accepting exactly what I said 7 pages ago in reply #1.

But far from a "meaningless parlour trick", special relativity explains and predicts pretty much everything we observe in space travel and particle physics.
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 17:54:17 by alancalverd »
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #190 on: 10/02/2016 18:26:44 »

I understood length contraction in the first place, a meaningless parlour trick, relative to the object, the object does not contract it just appears to contract to the observation.  It is relatively really poor science or poor definition. I would call it an observation contraction due to the relative velocity of the observed.
It is interesting that you have consistently denied the validity of The Lorentz transformation but now agree with it and attempt to explain your change of heart by waving it off as our misunderstanding of what you previously meant.



One's character is revealed in their personal mirror of reflection, whether honest or dishonest.
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 19:04:21 by Ethos_ »
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #191 on: 10/02/2016 19:03:48 »

I understood length contraction in the first place, a meaningless parlour trick, relative to the object, the object does not contract it just appears to contract to the observation.  It is relatively really poor science or poor definition. I would call it an observation contraction due to the relative velocity of the observed.
It is interesting that you have consistently denied the validity of The Lorentz transformation but now agree with it and attempt to explain your change of heart by waving it off as our misunderstanding of what you previously meant.

I seem to remember someone bringing up the question of honesty.

One's character is revealed in their personal mirror of reflection, whether honest or dishonest.

Originally I thought you meant that an object actually shrinks, and I thought I was explaining that an object does not shrink it is just a perspective view change, I though I was being told something else, sorry it got confusing,

Yes a Lorentz perspective view change happens, but relatively it means bugger all.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #192 on: 10/02/2016 19:11:15 »


Originally I thought you meant that an object actually shrinks, and I thought I was explaining that an object does not shrink it is just a perspective view change, I though I was being told something else, sorry it got confusing,

Yes a Lorentz perspective view change happens, but relatively it means bugger all.
We all make mistakes Mr. Box, don't let it quench your enthusiasm.
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #193 on: 10/02/2016 19:13:31 »


Originally I thought you meant that an object actually shrinks, and I thought I was explaining that an object does not shrink it is just a perspective view change, I though I was being told something else, sorry it got confusing,

Yes a Lorentz perspective view change happens, but relatively it means bugger all.
We all make mistakes Mr. Box, don't let it quench your enthusiasm.

Well nothing will quench my thirst until I exist.

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #194 on: 10/02/2016 19:16:46 »


Well nothing will quench my thirst until I exist.
Not sure what you mean there? Did you mean to say "exit" instead of "exist"?
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #195 on: 10/02/2016 19:21:04 »


Well nothing will quench my thirst until I exist.
Not sure what you mean there? Did you mean to say "exit" instead of "exist"?

No, I meant exist, someone does not exist in body alone, I want to be timeless , a part of history before I exit.  In simple terms I would love my name in Wiki.

I am proud of my children I would love them to be proud of me.
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 19:23:05 by Thebox »

*

Offline timey

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1511
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
    • Patreon
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #196 on: 10/02/2016 19:21:58 »
You have taken the first step towards understanding relativity, and indeed towards accepting exactly what I said 7 pages ago in reply #1.

But far from a "meaningless parlour trick", special relativity explains and predicts pretty much everything we observe in space travel and particle physics.

That is interesting Alan, but for my benefit of understanding could we define the effects of special relativity in relation to the effects of general relativity more clearly.

For instance, in the scenario whereby the train is travelling at a constant speed of 3mph, and the observer is increasing his 'rate' of counting every time a carriage passes his fixed point of vision... In fact let's give this a relevant context and say that the observer is standing on a gravity machine that is reducing the observers gravitational field by the inverse square law as each carriage passes the observers fixed point of vision, and that the observer is experiencing the subsequent increase of time experienced in a decreased gravitational field as each carriage passes...  Even at this very moderate constant speed of 3mph, the train carriages will be imperceptibly to the human eye, a fraction shorter.  However, if you translate the time it took the carriage to pass the observers fixed point of vision back into mph without equating that an hour is this fraction shorter, the distance that the train carriage covered becomes stretched.
The train, travelling at 3mph is not experiencing any significant special relativity effects of a slowing of its time, or a contracting of its journey distance - BUT, if it were, how indeed does this effect the observation of the observer?

If the train were to uptake a constant speed of say 1 quarter the speed of light, the observer on the platform would be unable to distinguish one carriage from another, but mathematically, the carriages would only appear shorter as per the fraction of a second that the observers time is running faster.

Surely the special relativity effects only apply to the accelerated reference frame?
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #197 on: 10/02/2016 19:26:48 »


No, I meant exist, someone does not exist in body alone, I want to be timeless , a part of history before I exit.  In simple terms I would love my name in Wiki.

I am proud of my children I would love them to be proud of me.
But I thought you placed no confidence in Wiki?

BTW, wanting your children to be proud of you is admirable Mr. Box. That gives me some faith in you Sir!
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #198 on: 10/02/2016 19:29:36 »
imperceptibly


If the speed is a constant 3 mph, and the observer is relatively stationary, all the carriages will look the same length to the observer. If the train accelerates, there will be a variation length of the carriages, they will get ''shorter'' the faster the acceleration the more carriages going past at a faster rate.


« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 19:34:50 by Thebox »

*

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3250
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #199 on: 10/02/2016 19:33:01 »


No, I meant exist, someone does not exist in body alone, I want to be timeless , a part of history before I exit.  In simple terms I would love my name in Wiki.

I am proud of my children I would love them to be proud of me.
But I thought you placed no confidence in Wiki?

BTW, wanting your children to be proud of you is admirable Mr. Box. That gives me some faith in you Sir!

Thank you, I have faith in Wiki is starting basis, it is something that is hopefully always moving forward. My ideas come from Wiki ideas, it is a starting point, although often I only read the definition of something, and that is often enough to think about that something.