:evil:
Show your math, please.
You have no idea how disappointed I am that my first impression of you was correct. :roll: Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"Einstein combined his assumptions concerning the "measured" constancy of the velocity of light with his first assumption that all motion is relative. This means that foreshortening or mass-gain is not "real" phenomenon but only a change in measurement. The amount by which length was decreased by or mass increased was not something that could be absolutely determined but different from observer to observer. :shock: #-o Solitary
Absolutely determined by what frame of reference?
Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Solitary"Einstein combined his assumptions concerning the "measured" constancy of the velocity of light with his first assumption that all motion is relative. This means that foreshortening or mass-gain is not "real" phenomenon but only a change in measurement. The amount by which length was decreased by or mass increased was not something that could be absolutely determined but different from observer to observer. :shock: #-o Solitary
Absolutely determined by what frame of reference?
Good question!
By an observers frame of reference or co-ordinates. And like it says, "not" absolutely. This does not mean that there isn't an absolute frame of reference like space-time. But one would have to be outside the universe to observe it, which would probably make it impossible. Solitary
Quote from: "Solitary"You have no idea how disappointed I am that my first impression of you was correct. :roll: Solitary
I'm sorry you don't want to back up your speculation with some hard facts.
Quote from: "Solitary"Quote from: "Jason78"Quote from: "Solitary"Einstein combined his assumptions concerning the "measured" constancy of the velocity of light with his first assumption that all motion is relative. This means that foreshortening or mass-gain is not "real" phenomenon but only a change in measurement. The amount by which length was decreased by or mass increased was not something that could be absolutely determined but different from observer to observer. :shock: #-o Solitary
Absolutely determined by what frame of reference?
Good question!
By an observers frame of reference or co-ordinates. And like it says, "not" absolutely. This does not mean that there isn't an absolute frame of reference like space-time. But one would have to be outside the universe to observe it, which would probably make it impossible. Solitary
A meaningless reference frame is no frame at all. So what are you left with?
Sigh. The "special" in special relativity is saying that the theory is only considered when you do your calculations in inertial reference frames — that is, frames that do not accelerate. It works in ANY system of coordinates (reference frame), as long as there are no forces on that frame, and you can freely translate a result in one frame into that of another, similarly inertial frame.
What it means is that you can use any reference frame that is convenient to do your physics in, as long as it is inertial, and your results will be valid.
I think you need to go back to your box, Sol.
Quote from: "Hakurei Reimu"Sigh. The "special" in special relativity is saying that the theory is only considered when you do your calculations in inertial reference frames — that is, frames that do not accelerate. It works in ANY system of coordinates (reference frame), as long as there are no forces on that frame, and you can freely translate a result in one frame into that of another, similarly inertial frame.
What it means is that you can use any reference frame that is convenient to do your physics in, as long as it is inertial, and your results will be valid.
I think you need to go back to your box, Sol.
Sol seems to have a file of "hot topics" that he fishes around in on a regular basis. "Just getting them out there." Good, because he has been able to defend his position on much so far. Seems shocked that anyone would even call him to do so. Silly boy, that shit don't work here.