Re: RAH and Light speed was Re: Awesum mind powerz!!!


Gerry Quinn wrote:

You made many 'responses', none of them addressing the point at issue.
You evaded endlessly posting about undefined concepts such as
'einsteinean physics' and 'newtonian relativity'.

Excuse me, but Wayne started out by mentioning "Galilean relativity",
which is a well-known term, and made it clear "newtonian relativity"
was a synonym. Galilean relativity says that the choice of a zero
velocity is arbitrary, and that all of the properties of Newtonian
physics are invariant under an alteration of velocity applied to the
system as a whole. Moving the whole universe north ten feet changes
nothing (which could be called Euclidean relativity.) Assuming the
whole universe has 10 ft/sec tacked on to every velocity in a north
direction is the same--Galilean relativity.

Now, if you haven't heard the term that is not Wayne's fault.

As for Einsteinean physics, in context that just means the physics of
relativity. So what's your beef? Do you just like to whine about
things?

When I finally got you to delineate specifically the physical systems
that are hypothesised by your concept of special relativity, and asked
you to demonstrate how a coherent model can be made that includes both
the 'physical spacetime' you proposed [I showed such a model for
Newtonian physics] and the qualities expected of a system belong to
classical physics, you ran away.

Excuse me, Buster, but you are the one who cut and ran. I pointed out
that your model of Newtonian physics involved modeling space by means
of a metric graph, where the verticies of the graph were the
"particles" of the "ether", and that this involved assuming invariance
properties. That is, because of Galilean relativity, the velocity of
the ether would need to be practically impossible to determine. I then
asked why you couldn't likewise assume relativistic invariance, and you
ran.

In fact, if you like this kind of model, you can simply turn R3 into a
metric graph. Each point in R3 could be the vertex of a graph, and
between any two distinct points you may assume an edge, with the length
of the edge being the distance between the two points. Hence
introducing the ether is a red herring--the points of space can serve
as your ether.

Anyone who reads the thread can verify this with ease.

Anyone can verify that you are being grossly unfair and unreasonable,
and are and have been completely full of shit on this issue. And I
notice that *no one* has suggested anything else.

Your 'physical spacetime' does not have the properties of locality,
measurement-independent reality, and counterfactual definiteness.

Excuse me, but who just accused Wayne of evading the issue by
"endlessly posting about undefined concepts"? Then you toss out
"counterfactual definiteness" as a property the usual notion of
spacetime lacks.

FULL of shit.

It's
rather easy to see. When asked how a portion of 'spacetime' might
differ physically between alternative systems containing similar
'events' in different configurations, you were unable to answer.

The question makes no sense unless you assume one portion of spacetime
can physically differ from another. That's true in GR, but false in SR.

You
cannot logically reconcile it with the three properties listed.

Which are undefined concepts of the sort you seem to post endlessly in
an attempt to evade the issue.

[Possible escapes: The physical differences are always 'somewhere
else' rather than in any given portion of spacetime - goodbye, locality
and worse.

Or the physically differences are encoded in the Riemann tensor, and
that is defined at every point. Of course, a curvature at a point is
meaningless without nearby points, but it does have a specific value.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... physics ideas, ... rotation between yourself and the stars. ... I know that its common for people trying to state Mach's Principle so ... rather than "absolute relativity". ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... physics ideas, ... rotation between yourself and the stars. ... I know that its common for people trying to state Mach's Principle so ... rather than "absolute relativity". ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • SR, curvature terms, and Realms of Validity
    ... >is a false theory of physics, while it may very well be ... Yep, people sometimes talk about SR's "realm of validity", but I don't ... It assumes that light is in no way affected by the presence or motion ... relativity, so that the total Doppler effect on a "gravitational" and ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Article: A Century of Einstein
    ... >> By thesame tokem since special relativity reduces to newtonian ... 2AB/= c to be a universal constant- the velocity of light in empty ... > interesting to hear why in physics things are what they are, ... > constant c and their dependence of Aether energy density u. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Google please assign this group a moderator
    ... Here, QM and relativity rule. ... It is just a matter of finding all the newtonian forces ... of physics runs too deep in your blood. ... universe to harvest and even divert our attention. ...
    (sci.physics)