Minkowski Space Time Briefly Revisited

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by danshawen, Nov 24, 2014.

  1. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    it appears you do not understand what you are quoting from. this is not einstein's actual papers , this is another one of einstein's " ideas and opinions " writings. as it clearly says " ideas and methods [ supplement ] ".

    " light is an electromagnetic wave [..]when electricity flows what it actually does is create a little bit magnetism[..]as that magnetic charge moves, it creates a little piece of electricity. electricity and magnetism are interwoven. so it is always pulsing forward.[..] it can only happen at a very particular speed[670 million miles].[...] light is an electromagnetic wave [ faraday and maxwell]
    maxwell's equations contained an incredible prediction, entities could never catch up to a beam of light. even if you were travelling at 670 million miles an hour, you still see light squiggle away from you at 670 million miles an hour.
    " so if an entity was traveling alongside the light wave, it wouldn't be moving it will be static. but maxwell says you can't have static light.[...]imagine if i was sitting still and holding a mirror to my face. the light travels from my face to the mirror, and i see my face. however, if i and the mirror were traveling at the speed of light [going at the same speed as light leaving your face, light never reaches the mirror. so would i be invisible [einstein]
    lights speed never ever changes. to fit lights fixed speed what einstein discovered was to that have to slow down time.
    as you approach the speed of light, time itself will slow down. einstein said that the tick tick tick on his wrist watch was actually the click click click of electricity turning into magnetism turning into electricity, the steady pace of light itself. the one true constant was not time or even space but light.

    farady could not convince royal society, because of his lack of mathematics
    maxwell came to faradys rescue, which maxwell had the mathematics skills.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
    brucep likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    The problem in Farsight's thinking here is that there is one, true, reference frame for the star. Farsight believes in an absolute reference frame that nobody can detect using any physical means. Einstein abandoned this idea, but Farsight never talks about that.
    The problem, like all Farsight's fantasy ideas, is that nobody should abandon the actual physics developed for a "rough idea". Until that "rough idea" can perform as physics, it isn't useful. One can use it as inspiration, but one can't use it for physics.
    Again, Farsight insults practicing scientists and ignores the work that they have done. All the while, he refuses to learn or do the physics that he claims to be an expert on.

    OK, so show us how to calculate a galaxy rotation curve. This is one of the things that you claim to be an expert on and to claim that everyone is doing wrong. Show us why you're an expert.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    i have never had a problem speaking with bruce. he has also shown me numerous times, he understands. he can even calculate to show you. i have a lot of respect for bruce. which is massively greater than i have seen from you. all i have ever seen from you was " no it isn't " or " scientist are wrong " just to fulfill your trolling addiction. nothing more. you know yourself that you are clueless . you're just here to cause problems.you always were. nothing more.
     
    Dr_Toad likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    A course in special relativity? Idiot wind. If you learned anything you might know that spacetime events are invariant not frame dependent.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
  8. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Spacetime events are invariant. The other dude thinks they're frame dependent. Everybody should understand that. Even Farsight.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  9. nimbus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    129
    If Dan and Shortsight want to chat without having to complain about “trolls”, then why don’t they go to Duffield’s own site. Perhaps Dan thinks there’s something odd about that other site, if not…go there Dan, what's your reason not to?
    I understand Shortsight is ”civil” there.
    No need for Shortsight to poach Here’s the Link…
    http://www.physicsdiscussionforum.org/index.php?sid=71966b9501c4c81f40f8e768b0295bb0
     
    brucep likes this.
  10. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    I would recommend against going to those forums and registering there. Farsight is known for threatening legal action against and for publishing personal information about those who disagree with him. He will undoubtedly use your IP address and registration information in order to attack those who disagree with him in an effective manner that he cannot simply insult away.

    Note that he expressed frustration at not being able to identify me and, as I would only continue to ask him scientific questions, he simply put me on ignore. Once he was shamed into taking me off ignore, but I suspect now it is clear that he can bear that shame more than the personal shame he feels at seeing my questions and not being able to answer them.

    Given his original story as to why he turned to physics, I suspect that he turned to this pseudo-physics in order to ignore the personal failings he had in raising his daughter (daughters? I can't remember). A poor life decision, but it explains the zealous devotion he has to his particular world view: to give up on that is to admit two failures, one worse than the other.
     
  11. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    The story about Clark Maxwell honoring Faradays work by writing it down for him really makes me misty eyed.
     
    krash661 likes this.
  12. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    Hi nimbus
    I didn't realize he had his own forum. I checked it out but you can't read any posts unless you become a member. LOL. That's typical for cranks. It's pathetic. The psychology of cranks. Cranks always have some issue to hang their hat on. For Shortsight it's everybody who is alive, except for him, doesn't understand the relativity theory Einstein proposed. danshawen believes that physics research turned in the wrong direction when it chose 'geometry over 'physical reality' and his nonsense about Peter Higgs mechanism and what it means to his delusional theory. Geometry over physical reality? LOL. That must be the source of his derision for mathematical physics. Finally they crave recognition and tend to make grandiose comments about their contribution to physics. Delusional comments.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
    nimbus, krash661 and paddoboy like this.
  13. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    586
  14. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    i thought hat was PMB's site. yzarc. they are similar.
     
  15. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    The 4D INTERVAL between space-time events is, yes, invariant for any inertial FoR. This is a basic Minkowski concept I actually agree with. And what happens when an "event" just doesn't happen in some FoR, that seems to happen in another? There's no 4D interval you can measure, that's what.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  16. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    Well, at least I am finally completely understood (the 'geometry' issue is exactly what I said). But what exactly is it that you think is "grandiose" about anything I have posted here, I have no idea. I'm interested only in what you think of some of these thought experiments; more specifically, if I have forgotten anything important. Same as any physics student would ask about their homework. What exactly about this makes someone "delusional" or a "crank"? Are you saying, you never asked for help with a physics problem, or never needed it? That would be unusual.
     
  17. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    Any trolls here (not you, krash661) may want to hang out in PSE, or MSE, or ESE. They really love trolls over there. They use them mostly for moderators. Don't take my word for it. I just got tired of arguing physics with a super rich 14 year old from India with some sort of physics divinity delusion combined with a smug, condescending and self-important disposition that makes Sheldon Cooper's character on BBT seem demure and humble.

    "crank" is something I would consider a compliment compared to what those folks are.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  18. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    And what about the part where the neighbor's kids basically stoned Oliver Heaviside (who cleaned up Maxwell's vector notation) to death? Possibly it had something to do with his hot pink finger nails or something… At least, he's in a kinder and gentler place. He's in the Heaviside layer now. I couldn't make up this stuff if I tried. Poor Oliver. Well, at least he wasn't ravaged by trolls.
     
  19. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    A link to this work might help, Farsight. http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/497/1/012016/pdf/1742-6596_497_1_012016.pdf

    iopscience is also Peter Higgs' (Scottish Physics) organization.
     
  20. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    OnlyMe has said:

    "The road you drive on does not change length as a byproduct of your velocity…"

    The ring of the LHC appears like it is about 12 meters in total circumference to the proton pancakes circulating in it at relativistic speed.

    The LHC ring is the ROAD. The proton pancake is YOU DRIVING on that road.

    Or did you simply mean that a road does not change its length "in the rest frame" as a result of being driven on? I would agree with that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  21. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    In post 346 your thought experiment creates a paradox based on your misunderstanding what a spacetime event represents in physics.. Just in everyday life like measuring a 2/4 in your garage. There is no frame in which the measurement doesn't occur. No shit Sherlock. So that's why I feel the need to bring it up. Considering how fundamentally simple the concept is. Stuff happens when and were it takes place. Read your post 346. There are no paradox. Simple rule.
     
  22. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,951
    I have no issues at all with Special Relativity and its descriptions of length contraction and time dilation between different FoRs. That's not at issue here, even in small measure.

    I have outlined a thought experiment in which intersecting energy pulses replace billiard balls colliding with each other at right angles at relativistic velocities. In many frames of reference which are of interest, the pulses do not appear to collide or interfere with each other at all. There is no Lorentz contraction or time dilation to deal with because the pulses are already traveling at c. Only Doppler shifts occur, and these change abruptly as the pulses pass the point where they are supposed to intersect, but actually do not. None of these reference frames have any means to determine whether what they saw is "real" or not, since no experiment can be performed to determine absolute motion. Only the FoR from which the pulses originated sees no Doppler shifts or transitions at the pulses intersect and pass each other.

    Even though nothing actually "accelerates" in Special Relativity, it is pretty much impossible for something, even energy, to transition from one FoR to another without undergoing acceleration. In the case of energy pulses. a Doppler shift "switches" from red to blue as soon as it passes the traveling observer; something otherwise impossible without some sort of acceleration taking place, under ordinary circumstances, like when a light pulse reflects from a mirrored surface. Nothing in the thought experiment accelerated, yet there was a change in sign of the Doppler shifts of the pulses as the observer FoR passed. I had not previously considered this feature of the same thought experiment. Curious.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2014
  23. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    The circumference of the LHC does not change because any particle or heavy ion travels near c around it.

    Proton pancakes are implied by impact data not observed.

    The proton can be length contracted into a pancake because it is moving at relativistic velocities. The LHC is not.

    If what you are saying were even close to true, a photon moving at c could never be redshifted because the distance between emmission and absorption would not exist. At c the distance would be infinetly contracted, to nothing, not even a wavelength of light.

    Length contraction applies to objects, not distances. It takes light a year to travel a light year. It does not make the trip instantly, because you think the distance is length contracted.

    You have a real problem understanding the difference between what might be perceived about one FoR from another and what happens to an object, traveling at relativistic velocities.
     

Share This Page