# Is it true?

January 2 2018 at 12:51 PM

 Respond to this message
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 1:24 PM
 >> is it true? yes, different people interpret the equations in different ways. The issue is: should the equations be interpreted in the way that Lorentz says they should be interpreted or should they be interpreted in the way that Einstein says they should be interpreted? And the answers proposed by people are many: some say by Einstein, some say by Lorentz, some say Einstein changed his mind and finally thought should interpret it Lorentz's way (the issue being Einstein 1905 denied ether then in 1920 seems to have accepted ether, and Lorentz was wanting things always to be interpreted from ether) and many other interpretations.
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 1:43 PM
 Both Einstein and Lorentz say that space is shrinking, but this is not the case in the formulas.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 6:18 PM
 what you probably mean is from special relativity context- Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction so the length of a moving object supposedly shrinks/contracts; its not the space that the object moves in that is shrinking; that is special relativity context. Then with general relativity its gets confusing with spacewarps et al, where space itself supposedly can shrink and expand in that.
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 6:35 PM
 It is the special relativity indeed, but it's almost the same in GR. According to Einstein, body is space, and they both shrink together, due to speed. However the formulas show that body-space expands. This is a silly contradiction between words and formulas.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 9:00 PM
 not quite, Pentcho has pointed out the absurdity that relativists claim. A train longer than a certain gap can shrink as it moves and fall down that gap, while the gap does not shrink: from:http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/thread/1496305660/last-1496347418/The+Good+Thing+About+Einstein%27s+Relativity http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg "Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity" It is not difficult to realize that trapping unlimitedly long objects inside unlimitedly short containers implies unlimited compressibility and drastically violates the law of conservation of energy. The unlimitedly compressed object, in trying to restore its original volume ("spring back to its natural shape"), would produce an enormous amount of work the energy for which comes from nowhere. At 9:01 in the above video Sarah sees the train falling through the hole, and in order to save Einstein's relativity, the authors of the video inform the gullible world that Adam as well sees the train falling through the hole. However Adam can only see this if the train undergoes an absurd bending first, as shown at 9:53 in the video and in this picture: [linked image] Clearly we have reductio ad absurdum: An absurd bending is required - it does occur in Adam's reference frame but doesn't in Sarah's. Conclusion: The underlying premise, Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, is false. Pentcho Valev
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 2 2018, 9:04 PM
 add on: if you are saying relativists don't understand relativity and what they claim of relativity is really different to what relativity gives; then I agree "they" don't understand relativity.
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 3 2018, 8:34 PM
 Pentcho is not relevant. Einstein said that moving body shrinks longitudinally, but the Lorentz formula saying that moving body expands longitudinally.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 3 2018, 9:44 PM
 >>Einstein said that moving body shrinks longitudinally, but the Lorentz formula saying that moving body expands longitudinally. the usual problem with that is: given two observers A and B with A observing B moving on the moving body (i.e. on train or whatever), who is claiming that the moving body shrinks- is it A or B
jz

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 7:02 AM
 The Lorentz transformations of special relativity may also be written with Δx and Δt and Δx' and Δt'. (and γ =1/√(1-v^2/c^2)) If the observer is in the unprimed system and the observed rod in the primed system (with length Δx’), Δt must be set to zero (for the observation: t1=t2) and Δx must be solved (expressed in terms of Δx'). Result: Δx=Δx'/γ. If the observer is in the primed system and the observed rod in the unprimed system (with length Δx), Δt’ must be set to zero (for the observation: t1’=t2’) and Δx’ must be solved (expressed in terms of Δx). Result: Δx’=Δx/γ. Both see length contraction in the other frame. Time observation is as follows: If the observer is in the unprimed system and the observed clock in the primed system, Δx’ must be set to zero (the clock does not move in its own frame) and Δt must be solved (expressed in terms of Δt'). Result: Δt= γ Δt'. If the observer is in the primed system and the observed clock in the unprimed system, Δx must be set to zero (the clock does not move in its own frame) and Δt’ must be solved (expressed in terms of Δt). Result: Δt’= γ Δt. Both see time dilation in the other frame.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 8:57 AM
 jz>>Both see length contraction in the other frame. Yes that is what is usually claimed by mainstream, but “a” claims: a>>>>the Lorentz formula saying that moving body expands longitudinally. So, maybe what he means is that according to observer that moves with the moving body, relative to him the surroundings have shrunk and his moving body is longer. i.e. given a test length L, which both A and B agree on when they are both stationary with respect to each other, such that A says his length L1 =L and B says his length L2 =L, then as B moves with moving body taking with him his length L2, he will say that L now becomes shorter than L2 thus alternatively L2 has become longer than L
Anonym

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 12:57 PM
 roger you rotating in circle. read the einstein 1905 paper.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 1:35 PM
 >>you rotating in circle. no, talking about linear motion and not circular motion
Anonym

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 2:18 PM
 it's a metaphor.
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 6:15 PM
 non seq
Amigo

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 6:28 PM
 Einstein moved the clock along a polygon - SO - it was about 75% circular =====>>>https://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0208/0208234.pdf
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 8:03 PM
 Einstein 1905, p.7: s=b(x-v.t)=b.x' Viewed moving body expands with its system k (this shrinks system K). p.10: x'=b.s Viewed moving body shrinks with k, because K expands. The viewer is in his stationary system K all the time. quote: "all moving objects — viewed from the “stationary” system —shrivel up into plane figures." Well, the moving body should expand by the initial Lorentz formula, but also it should shrink by some additional Einstein magic. LOL
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 8:05 PM
 http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Einstein_1905_relativity.pdf
roger

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 8:23 PM
 >>>also it should shrink by some additional Einstein magic. LOL yes LOL as for >>quote: "all moving objects — viewed from the “stationary” system —shrivel up into plane figures." "stationary frame" becomes ambiguous because a person moving with the moving object can treat being in a "stationary" frame; so its not just the frame that the object is being moved from that is the "stationary" frame. lol
a

# Re: Is it true?

January 4 2018, 8:43 PM
 Einstein is a big magician and joker too.

 < Previous Page 1 2 3 4 Next > Respond to this message