0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
And I want to repeat: Is this section NEW THEORIES?
In reality, there is no difference between those two "types" of relativity that you mention. Relative speed is relative speed. Whether those velocities are caused by a force or not is irrelevant. A car travelling at 60 kilometers per hour is the same as an asteroid floating through space at 60 kilometers per hour. Just because the car has to expend energy to produce that motion doesn't somehow change how relativity affects it.
You may call it that, though I have no idea why. subtracting velocities from 2 reference frames like this is classical relativity. To be more accurate you could have used special relativity but the difference in the answers would be miniscule.
I understood that you are unaware of classical/Galilean relativity from your this phrase.
Galilean relativity is a method for materials.
Where is the SR?
I understood that you are unaware of classical/Galilean relativity from your this phrase. Galilean relativity is a method for materials. Where is the SR?
A single car obtains its speed by the essential help of the road.
This speed is exact/genuine relative according to the road. The effect of the reference frame is a distinguishing feature. On the exact/genuine relativity, the car moves away from starting point with its this relative speed; or its distance increases with its own speed.
The distance between two moving cars increases or decreases with the speed value VR = Va +/- Vb; hence, if we consider Galilean relativity method, we have to choice any one of the cars for reference role; and if we isolate the cars, the relative speed of other car is VR.
These cars obtain their speeds without the effect of other one.
Resultant speedis hypothetical value; any one of the cars never goes with this speed value. Therefore this type relationship is "hypothetical relativity". Distinguishing feature is clearly understandable.
The light source only leaves the photon; does not push/throw the photon; and the photon does not apply to its source for its motion. And the source can go to anywhere freely after leaving the photon.
The distance between the photon and its source increases/decreases with the speed c +/- Vu value like two cars case.
So if I am driving at 50 mph and another car passes me at 200 mph and I stick my arm out the window so the other car hits my arm, is my arm only hypothetically ripped off?Your big misunderstanding seem to be that you have a belief that there is a preferred frame. This is a basic error.You are saying relative velocity between the road and the car is the real velocity, but the relative velocity between 2 cars is not the real velocity. That is completely wrong.
There is no democracy in science
As if the science forum turned into a political arena. I am perceiving/intuiting political maneuvers (demagogy, consolidation phrases, irrelevant examples, prejudices, etc.). There is no democracy in science and conservatism is antipathic. The misconception that the majority approves approaches to natural reality at the end of the process. Remember the dogmas of majority: the sun revolves around the earth; the world is the center of the universe. etc
You seem more technical and objectively. Please clearly define your problem about 1.5 c (
In other words, light deserves the role of reference.
That would be a terrible reference! Think about it. How fast are you going relative to light? The answer is zero for all inertial frames.
Quote from: xersanozgen on Yesterday at 18:31:22In other words, light deserves the role of reference.That would be a terrible reference! Think about it. How fast are you going relative to light? The answer is zero for all inertial frames.
SR also allows this method. Because the speed of light is the same value according to each frame, hence the outermost / space vacuum / LCS. We have to consider / use universal value (e.g. Vu) of other actor's parameter for scientific integrity.In the traditional flow, humanity is in the habit of giving to local objects a role of reference. SR could not overcome this habit, and also applied the definition/treatment of local value to the measured speed of light. However, the measured value is more likely to be the universal speed of light, and if we used in this definition, there will be no hesitation about the accuracy of the process.Yes we may not know the numerical value of the source's universal speed. However, this case is not a difficulty for theoretical analysis.LCS method has not a inconsistency/opposition for SR mentality.And an advantage of LCS method that the cosmological analysis is possible (as known, SR never allow this because of non - simultaneity of parameters.):
Do the math that shows relativity is wrong and stop the word salad and arm waving.
Let's just concentrate on one idea. Let's look at you idea that the speed of light and the speed of the source is additive.Assume a space ship is traveling towards earth and when it is 10 light seconds from earth it shoots a laser at earth. You say the laser light is traveling at 1.5c. That of course means that it will only take 6.666 sec to reach earth. You also say that this light when measured on earth will be measured as c, not 1.5c. You have not given any sort of reasonable explanation of why or how this could be possible.Please explain how that is possible.
because we had understanding crises on elementary issues.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 07/05/2020 18:31:22There is no democracy in science Quite right.The only arbiter is experiment.Every aspect of general relativity has been tested in every way we can think of, to all the precision we can manage, and it has passed every test.So, how could your ideas be better?
The surface of our paper or monitor screen is LCS (Fig. 1). At the moment of Tı (when the intermediate distance is 10 c, the photon will arrive to the observer on the world after 6.66 seconds, because when the photon is approaching to the world, the world is also approaching the photon with a speed of 0.5 c according to LCS. The eye contact with the photon will realize at 6.66666 seconds.
Although the light source goes to the opposite direction (- x) of the photo (Fig. 2), the distance between the photon released from the light source on the earth and its source increases with the speed of c + Vu;
However the photon velocity will always be found as c by the present measurement method/experiment.
I lost my motivation to share in this forum. I am not sure of the technical training of some of my interlocutors; because we had understanding crises on elementary issues. They also could not manage the crisis and exhibited troll behavior becouse of prioritizing their own catharsis. As a result, this asymmetrical attitudes cannot be maintained. It is enough for me that they get the note that there are those who object to SR.
Assume a space ship is traveling towards earth and when it is 10 light seconds from earth it shoots a laser at earth. You say the laser light is traveling at 1.5c. That of course means that it will only take 6.666 sec to reach earth. You also say that this light when measured on earth will be measured as c, not 1.5c. You have not given any sort of reasonable explanation of why or how this could be possible.Please explain how that is possible.
You say the laser light is traveling at 1.5c. This claim never be mine.