Xavier Onassiss Posted January 3, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? <--- I always wanted to use that one! If you don't want to consult a physics teacher, perhaps you'll find what you're after on crank.net's 'einstein was wrong' page. I'd skip the stuff labeled 'illucid' or merely 'cranky' and 'crankier.' Go straight for the 'crankiest' entries for the very best (or worst!) de-bunking of Einstein the internet has to offer. You're welcome! Don't look at me, Xavier Onassiss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? I'm not looking to debunk Einstein. I want to know whether the train car is "catching up to" the light, or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawnmower Boy Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Easy. You turn on your headlights or taillights, and the light recedes from you at c. Speed up to 99% of the speed of light, and the photons will still be streaming out of your bulbs at 3E8 m/s, relative to you. From both ends. As explained in those videos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Easy. You turn on your headlights or taillights' date=' and the light recedes from you at c. Speed up to 99% of the speed of light, and the photons will still be streaming out of your bulbs at 3E8 m/s, relative to you. From both ends. As explained in those videos.[/quote'] I watched the video you posted, all it talks about is the diagram. And really, that's not the effect the train car example seems to be talking about. The train car is moving, the oddness comes in when it talks about the observer on the train seeing the train car not catching up to the light, and the observer on the platform seeing the train car catching up to the light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrath Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? If it's the latter . . . further discussion is pointless. I guess it is the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Not sure what other people want. What I want is an answer to a very basic, simple question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austenandrews Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? I want to know whether the train car is "catching up to" the light' date=' or not.[/quote'] Not catching up (which would require FTL) but yes, the train moves relative to the light in all frames of reference except the frame of reference of the car itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? I'm using "catching up" as shorthand to avoid some other terminology confusion, but that seems inevitable at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
austenandrews Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? So does that clear anything up? The train is moving relative to the photons, except in the one frame of reference where the train by definition is not moving at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeropoint Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? What I want is an answer to a very basic, simple question. Okay . . . but you've been GIVEN the answer to that question a dozen times by now: IT DEPENDS. I want to know whether the train car is "catching up to" the light, or not. This question DOES NOT HAVE a single absolute answer. . . . You know, it's just a little ironic that the person with a "cognitive hazard" warning sign for an avatar is the one having trouble with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? No, nothing is more clear. You know what, never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrath Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? What I want is an answer to a very basic' date=' simple question.[/quote'] Are you sure? We have given you the answer, again and again. It seems more likely to me that what you want is an answer to a very basic, simple question that you will accept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Are you sure? We have given you the answer, again and again. It seems more likely to me that what you want is an answer to a very basic, simple question that you will accept. The answer given hasn't really been an answer to the actual question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeropoint Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? The answer given hasn't really been an answer to the actual question. Yes, it has, but your unreasoning attachment to outmoded models of spacetime is causing you to reject it. You will never get an answer that satisfies you because you are not happy with the way the universe works. I'm done here. Go tell God that He built the universe wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 3, 2010 Report Share Posted January 3, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Yes' date=' it has, but your unreasoning attachment to outmoded models of spacetime is causing you to reject it.[/quote'] So now you're a telepath too, an actual mind reader? No, really, you're able to tell, sitting there about 2300 miles away, what I'm thinking at this moment? That's absolutely amazing. What other amazing powers do you have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinanju Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? So now you're a telepath too' date=' an actual mind reader? No, really, you're able to tell, sitting there about 2300 miles away, what I'm thinking at this moment? That's absolutely amazing. What other amazing powers do you have? [/quote'] As far as I can tell, you want to know whether the light hits the front and the back of the train at the same time (starting from the middle of the train car). The only objective answer is: the only thing we can say is objectively true is that light ALWAYS moves at lightspeed. The sequence of events an observer will witness depends on his frame of reference. If he's in the same frame of reference as the train car, it will appear to hit both front and rear of the car at the same time. If he's in a different frame of reference, moving at some signficant fraction of C relative to the train, he will see something else. But he will still see light moving at lightspeed in all possible scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest steamteck Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Of course when the aliens arrive and we find their technology cannot possibly work with our model of the universe and visa versa things will REALLY get interesting;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeropoint Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? So now you're a telepath too, an actual mind reader? No, really, you're able to tell, sitting there about 2300 miles away, what I'm thinking at this moment? That's absolutely amazing. What other amazing powers do you have? Not mind reading, simple deduction. You've had this explained to you a dozen different times; simply and in detail, with adequate references. You claim to understand what these explanations and references are saying. And still, you persist in asking a question that is clearly meaningless in the context of relativistic simultaneity. I am at a loss to imagine any explanations for your behavior other than an inability to understand what we have been trying to convey, or a stubborn refusal to accept the truth. You claim to understand the material, and I am taking you at your word--this leaves me with only one conclusion. Again, it's possible that you're missing part of the explanation and have not successfully communicated that to the rest of us; if this is so, I apologize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianaJoe3 Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Let me try another analogy. (I apologize in advance if this comes across as condescending.) You and three of your gamer buddies are sitting around the table (one per side). In the middle of the table are four dice. They are arranged in a square, rotated roughly 45° to the table. Now, which die is in front? "It depends. In front of who?" Exactly! "Front" is a relative frame of reference. Picture you and your buddies each having a world-line extending in front of them, and the dice represent events. Which event happens, "first" depends on which observer we are talking about. (This example is exaggerated, but I think the principle is sound.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyrath Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? You claim to understand the material' date=' and I am taking you at your word--this leaves me with only one conclusion.[/quote'] Actually, two possible conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? As far as I can tell, you want to know whether the light hits the front and the back of the train at the same time (starting from the middle of the train car). The only objective answer is: the only thing we can say is objectively true is that light ALWAYS moves at lightspeed. The sequence of events an observer will witness depends on his frame of reference. If he's in the same frame of reference as the train car, it will appear to hit both front and rear of the car at the same time. If he's in a different frame of reference, moving at some signficant fraction of C relative to the train, he will see something else. But he will still see light moving at lightspeed in all possible scenarios. What I've been trying to dig down to, and asking the wrong question in some posts, is whether the train car is moving or stationary with regard to the motion of the photons from the flash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajackson Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? What I've been trying to dig down to' date=' and asking the wrong question in some posts, is whether the train car is moving or stationary with regard to the motion of the photons from the flash.[/quote'] Depends what reference frame you're answering the question in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeropoint Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? Depends what reference frame you're answering the question in. I think it's clear by now that he's unwilling to accept this, or maybe that he just enjoys our reactions as he pretends to reject it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristopher Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? I'm not enjoying this at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cancer Posted January 4, 2010 Report Share Posted January 4, 2010 Re: Instantaneous Communications plus Time Dilation Equals ??? BTW' date=' I am sorry about getting worked up and derailing the thread. I'm going to have to do a lot of reading to reconcile that train example with an objective universe, I'm afraid. I [i']am[/i] convined that the universe is objective, so everything, IMO, has to work from there. Since I'm on board to teach the sophomore-level relativity course in the spring, I'm doing my preparations imagining how to to deal with a student that is hung up on the thing I think you're hung up on. I have real doubts that I can do a decent job in this forum, though. No mathematics, and waayyyyy too much lag for trying to pick apart exactly where you're hung up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.