0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The determination of "The Sun rotates around the Earth" is an experimental result.
I personally performed an experiment about Fitzgerald contraction.
I just share alternative synthesis.
This LCS concept allows cosmological analyzes and calculates the current age of the universe;
I'll repeat what Bored Chemist said earlier: what experiment did you perform to search for Fitzgerald contraction? It was an actual experiment, wasn't it? Not just a thought experiment?
Yes, it is a practical experiment; every one can perform; its budget is very low and easy:http://vixra.org/pdf/1905.0094v1.pdf
Quote from: xersanozgen on 06/10/2019 15:20:09Yes, it is a practical experiment; every one can perform; its budget is very low and easy:http://vixra.org/pdf/1905.0094v1.pdfIf your equipment was in the same reference frame as the conductor, it won't see any length contraction. So of course it won't measure any resistance change...
If you examine the process, in the M-M experiment, you can understand that the contraction must actually occur in the K' system so that the number of fringes does not change.
That is, the special theory of relativity is based on the fact that deformations occur by metabolically and actually.
My experience proves that conractions are not generated in the K' frame; because the measurements are isotropic.
However, a phenomenon that does not really occur and is perceived only by the external observer is not meaningful to science.
If you say the time dilation are visually perceived by only The observer of K system; in this case the legend of time travel becomes a myth/fairy tale.
How fast does something have to travel before it contracts by 0.4% ?
About 8.9% the speed of light: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/length-contraction
What do you mean by "metabolically"?
Are you defining K' as the reference frame of an observer moving with the apparatus or moving relative to the apparatus? In the frame of an observer co-moving with the apparatus (that is, the apparatus is at rest according to this observer) no contraction can be measured by said observer whereas in the frame of an observer that is not co-moving with the apparatus (that is, the apparatus is moving according to this second observer) a contraction will be observed.
Then I presume that what you call the K' frame is the frame where an observer is at rest relative to the apparatus. In such a case, no contraction is expected to be measured in the first place.
It if wasn't really occurring, it couldn't be observed by anyone. Yet it can be, so we know that it's really happening.
There you go with the non-sequitur again. What makes you say this? Time dilation has been experimentally verified. That demonstrates that your reasoning is flawed. We know that observers in different reference frames will measure different rates of the passage of time because we've actually measured it. When reasoning clashes with reality, you throw out the reasoning, not reality. You don't have to like it, but you can't pretend that your reasoning ability somehow overrides reality itself. Although length and duration can appear different to different observers, the total space-time interval will be agreed upon by all observers regardless of reference frame.
Let's take two candles (A; B) and burn them at the same time. Then, one of them (B) moves away by the train.When the candle A completes its life and extinguishes; we see B still on fire. Because the photon that determines the moment of B's finishing has not reached us yet, and needs time to travel the distance BA. So, to see the B's ending moment will delay. This perception does not change even if the train stops there or continues its movement. That is to say, we may think that the the lifetime of the candle B increased due to SR's time dilation. However, in this experiment, both candles live at the same normal tempo (metabolically). Their proper times/tempos are the same. If there is a confusion; suppose the train comes back and meets us while the candle continues to light. In this case we will see that both candles ended at the same moment. It means In this fiction, time dilation is not metabolically realized.
But, in MM experiment, Fitzgerald contraction (for the light's path on moving direction) must be really happened for the result of exp. (Same number of fringes). It means, the observer of K' frame perceives the contraction.
In my opinion, SR predicts/claims genuine deformations for moving body. My electrical resistance experience does not prove/support this inferences of the theory.
Of course we generally use visual sense. However we have to be interrogator; otherwise, all of tricks of magicians and illusionists would be supposed reality and somebodies would take seriously.
Please give me the link of this experiment.