On Jul 9, 7:05 pm, kenseto <kens...@erinet.com> wrote: > On Jul 9, 3:02 pm, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 8:59 pm, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > > On Jul 9, 10:09 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 7, 5:43 pm, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 7, 8:52 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 6, 3:03 pm, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 7, 3:07 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > The problem, you see, is that the comic-book statement you are using > > > > > > > > as your launching point belongs in COLP's Oversimplified Relativity. > > > > > > > > It's not a comic book statement any more than Einstein's statement > > > > > > > that a moving clock lags behind a stationary clock is a comic book > > > > > > > statement. > > > > > > > Not so. Einstein's statement included things that you have discounted. > > > > > > I haven't discounted them. > > > > > > > For example, he makes note of specific events, rather than just making > > > > > > the general statement that "moving clocks" run slow. > > > > > > The description of the specific events only serves to illustrate that > > > > > it is the moving clock that runs slow compared to the stationary > > > > > clock. > > > > > Then you have misunderstood what he said. The EVENTS do more than > > > > that. > > > > How, exactly? > > > > > > > Furthermore, he > > > > > > makes EXPLICIT mention of the statement that the clocks at points A > > > > > > and B are initially synchronized IN THE K FRAME. > > > > > > Assuming that they weren't synchonized in my general description of > > > > > "the moving clock runs slow" would be arbitrary and illogical. > > > > > They are synchronized in the K frame. They are not synchronized in the > > > > K' frame. This is essential and cannot be dismissed. > > > > If they are not synchronized in the K' frame, then the K frame becomes > > > the preferred frame of reference, which contradicts Einstein's first > > > postulate. > > > Why? Two clocks being synchronized or not synchronized do not > > determine a preferred frame. > > A preferred frame is one in which the LAWS OF PHYSICS are different > > than in other frames. > > In that case what are the differences in the LAWS OF PHYSICS between a > preferred frame and an inertial frame?
Well, that would be the point. We've never discovered a frame in which the laws of physics are different.
> For eample: Does a preferred > observer's clock runs at a different rate than an inertial SR > observer's clock....does it runs fast or slow??? Failure to answer > this question will mean that you are trying to bull shit your way out.
Ken, the rate of a clock is not a law of physics. It might help to learn the meaning of terms used in physics before trying to discuss them. Here's one to learn: "law of physics".
> > Ken Seto > > > > > > > Perhaps the difficulty is in your understanding of what a preferred > > frame means. > > > > > > Remember I was talking about _the_ clock, in reference to the moving > > > > > clock described in "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies", not to a clock > > > > > in an arbitrary system. > > > > > I understand that completely. There are two clocks involved here: One > > > > that moves from A to B and one that remains at B. There is a frame K > > > > in which points A and B are at rest, and there is a frame K' in which > > > > points A and B are moving and the first clock above is at rest. > > > > Yes, I agree. > > > > > > > A contradiction would > > > > > > arise by making the clock at B the moving clock only if the clocks are > > > > > > claimed to be intially synchronized also in the K' frame -- but they > > > > > > are NOT, and this is the essential detail that you have missed. > > > > > > No, it isn't a missing detail, it is an implication of Einstein's > > > > > first postulate of relativity. > > > > > WHAT is an implication of the first postulate? That they are also > > > > synchronized in K'? No. > > > > The implication is that if there is no preferred frame of reference > > > then predictions made in one inertial frame will be just as valid as > > > predictions made in any other inertial frame, and if it is possible to > > > synchronize clocks in one inertial frame them it is possible to > > > synchronize clocks in any other inertial frame. > > > It is of course possible to resynchronize the clocks in K'. However, > > this will mean that they are no longer synchronized in K. What is true > > is that there is no way to have them be synchronized in BOTH K and K' > > at once. > > > Now, again, if you are reading the principle of relativity to say that > > "Clocks that are synchronized in one inertial frame are also > > synchronized in other inertial frames," then you do not understand > > what the principle of relativity says. > > > The principle of relativity does NOT say that an observation in one > > inertial frame will be identical to an observation in any other > > inertial frame. For example, an object that is stationary in one > > inertial frame would not be expected to be stationary in other > > inertial frames. Nor does it mean that the values of physical > > quantities are the same in all inertial frames. For example, the > > momentum of an object or even a closed system in one inertial frame is > > not the same as that same quantity in other inertial frames. > > > The principle of relativity explicitly makes a statement about the > > form of the LAWS OF PHYSICS in different inertial frames being > > identical. > > > So, it appears that so far, we've had to explain to you what a > > preferred frame means, and what the principle of relativity means. > > > > > > Here is Einstein's description of the clocks: > > > > > > "If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, > > > > > viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at > > > > > A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its > > > > > arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved > > > > > from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B ..." > > > > > > Let us call the moving system K', in which the moving clocks at A' and > > > > > B' are synchronized for an observer in K'. The stationary system K > > > > > also has two clocks, but these two clocks are synchronized for an > > > > > observer in K. Frames K and K' move at a constant velocity with > > > > > respect to each other. > > > > > > If there is no preferred frame of reference then there is no reason > > > > > why the clocks at A' and B' cannot also be synchronized for an > > > > > observer in K', just as the clocks at A and B are for an observer in > > > > > K, due to the symmetry of the two frames and their respective clocks. > > > > > Yes, that is true but the clock that is synchronized with B in K will > > > > not initially show the same time as the clock that is synchronized > > > > with B in K'. > > > > Are you saying that the clock at A in K (that is synchronized with the > > > clock at B in K) will not initially show the same time as the clock at > > > A' in K' (that is synchronized with the clock at B' in K'? > > > That's right, if B is synchronized with B'. Note that you do not need > > these two extra clocks. Let's stick with the two clocks in Einstein's > > statement, so I can explain exactly what he is saying. > > > > > Now YOU are the one that is adding things beyond what Einstein > > > > actually said. > > > > What I am adding (two more clocks in K') does not change Einstein's > > > postulates. Neither does making predictions from the point of view of > > > an observer in each frame affect the postulates. > > > > > There are only TWO clocks in Einstein's paragraph. One that moves from > > > > A to B and one that remains at B. In the frame K, the clocks are > > > > synchronized when the clocks are at A and B. > > > > Right. > > > > > In the frame K' that you > > > > propose, those same two clocks are not synchronized when the clocks > > > > are at A and B. > > > > I'm not talking about the same two clocks. I'm talking about two > > > frames which are the same in all respects except for their relative > > > motion (in order to establish symmetry). Thus in the K frame the clock > > > at A' moves from A to B. When point A = point A', the clocks at these > > > points are synchronized, just as Einstein's clock at A was > > > synchronized with B before it moved towards B. > > > > Looking at the situation from the point of view of an observer in K', > > > the clock at B moves from B' to A'.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -