0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 28/04/2021 15:07:17But wait a second - from your description it seems, that this ship is moving at 100%c. Am I right?No, as I stated earlier the ship just under the speed of light, specifically c - 1km/s.
But wait a second - from your description it seems, that this ship is moving at 100%c. Am I right?
Nope. The scenario is that the laser is at rest relative to the ship. So let's assume the laser is on earth and it is aimed at a photoreceptor 4 ly away in the same frame as the earth. As the ship flies by the earth the laser is fired at the target.So.....From the frame of the ship after about 2 years the ship will have traveled 2 ly and since the speed of light is c relative to the ship the light will be 2 ly ahead of the ship so it will reach the photo cell in 2 years, so it will record 2 years elapsed time. From the frame that the laser was fired the light will take 4 years to reach the the photo cell so it will mark 4 years. So there will be 2 different times that the light arrives.
The scenario is that the laser is at rest relative to the ship.
Ok, so this is what I figured out from your desccription - I just made the velocity of space ship little less than c. Is this correct?
Still this doesn't make sense. If the laser is fired when space ship is passing next to Earth and that space ship moves at 0,99c (or so), then from where did you get those 2ly???
Also this won't never happen, if that laser is about to ever hit the space ship
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 28/04/2021 15:19:00Ok, so this is what I figured out from your desccription - I just made the velocity of space ship little less than c. Is this correct?Assuming the yellow line is light and the blue line is the ship that is not right. You have the ships starting point 2 ly from the origin for some reason. The laser and the ship both are at the origin at t = 0.The other major problem is you have no transforms to make your graphs!This is not a mathematical transform: X' = X - vt + (light doesn't follow these rules). Edit to fix x and x'.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 28/04/2021 15:36:23Still this doesn't make sense. If the laser is fired when space ship is passing next to Earth and that space ship moves at 0,99c (or so), then from where did you get those 2ly???I was trying to make it easy by using rough numbers. Actually the ship will be 31,536 km short of 2 ly after 2 years of travel using a speed of (c - 1 km/s) I stated, which is small enough to disregard.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 28/04/2021 15:41:41Also this won't never happen, if that laser is about to ever hit the space shipWhat? Why would the laser hit the ship?
I've made as well a small "upgrade" of the scenario and now in the frame of Earth at t=0 both the Earth and the photoreceptor (let's make it a space station) are simultaneously emitting lasers towards each other - this way things will be more interesting
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 30/04/2021 01:45:12I've made as well a small "upgrade" of the scenario and now in the frame of Earth at t=0 both the Earth and the photoreceptor (let's make it a space station) are simultaneously emitting lasers towards each other - this way things will be more interestingLet's not make it 'interesting'. I don't want to over complicate the example, the point of the discussion is to clearly and simply test your concept of relativity. The goal here is to test your hypothesis as clearly and concisely as possible.You also seem to have trouble understanding my proposal that the speed of the spaceship is almost c. That is my fault and since the speed of the spaceship is not important, let's make the example simpler and say the spaceship is moving at .5c.Here is my example and I hope it is clear to you:There is a laser and a receiver both at rest with 4 ly separating them. There is also spaceship that is traveling at .5c relative to the rest frame. Here is a picture showing that. explain1.JPG (10.45 kB . 600x300 - viewed 2562 times)Here we show the spaceship as it flies by the laser. Just as the ship reaches the laser the laser fires at the receiver. We will designate this point (the ship passing the laser) as the origin of our coordinate system. Here is the picture of that. explain2.JPG (20.71 kB . 600x300 - viewed 2572 times)Now we can draw a space time diagram for the 2 inertial frames. Your relativity is based on Galilean relativity (t' = t and L' = L) and also states that the speed of light is c in all inertial frames. Since t' = t, we can have all the clocks synchronized.The first space time diagram is from the frame of the laser and the receiver. This shows that the laser light would reach the receiver in 4 years and the spaceship would reach the receiver in 8 years. This makes sense so far. Laser frame.jpg (22.46 kB . 600x450 - viewed 9673 times)The second space time diagram is from the frame of the spaceship, which means the ship remains at x = 0 and the receiver 'moves' towards the spaceship. Since the speed of light is c in all inertial frames, that means the laser will move at c towards the receiver relative to the ship. After approximately 2.7 years the light from the laser will reach the receiver. ship frame.jpg (21.29 kB . 600x450 - viewed 4528 times)There is obviously something wrong! The light from the laser cannot arrive at the receiver at year 2.7 and year 4! The reason for the discrepancy is because you arbitrarily put in the stipulation that the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames without any mathematical reason. In other words you allow light and only light to violate Galilean relativity. It is no wonder the results don't make sense.Please let me know if you think there is a mistake in this.
I don't understand your confusion... Stationary source of light has an invalid view on the frame of a moving receiver.
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 30/04/2021 21:52:49I don't understand your confusion... Stationary source of light has an invalid view on the frame of a moving receiver.As I clearly stated the laser and the receiver are stationary with respect to each other.
So? It doesn't matter. Here you have (added second blue worldline at x=0)
The issue is that in the ship's frame the light will reach the the receiver in about 2.7 years instead of 4 years. If you decide to add lines to the graph, please label them. ship frame.jpg (21.29 kB . 600x450 - viewed 2503 times)
So what? His view of a moving frame is distorted and invalid by default...
Quote from: CrazyScientist on 01/05/2021 01:02:48So what? His view of a moving frame is distorted and invalid by default...Why? Because this gives a result you don't like?
Could you please cite your source that says there are certain inertial frames where relativity is invalid.
No. Because it's a well known scientific fact, that moving things appear distorted for a stationary observer
In my model ALL inertial frames ARE valid. Moving frames are the invalid ones