Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Replies: 5   Last Post: Jan 13, 2013 5:27 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Pentcho Valev

Posts: 4,403
Registered: 12/13/04
Posted: Jan 10, 2013 5:11 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

Divine Albert fools relativity believers:

Albert Einstein: "An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction... (...) The observer performs experiments on his circular disc with clocks and measuring-rods. In doing so, it is his intention to arrive at exact definitions for the signification of time- and space-data with reference to the circular disc K', these definitions being based on his observations. What will be his experience in this enterprise? To start with, he places one of two identically constructed clocks at the centre of the circular disc, and the other on the edge of the disc, so that they are at rest relative to it. We now ask ourselves whether both clocks go at the same rate from the standpoint of the non-rotating Galileian reference-body K. As judged from this body, the clock at the centre of the disc has no velocity, whereas the clock at the edge of the disc is in motion relative to K in consequence of the rotation. According to a result obtained in Section XII, it follows that the latter clock goes at a rate permanently slower than that of the clock at the centre of the circular disc, i.e. as observed from K."

In fact, Section XII in Divine Albert's book does not contain any results explaining why the clock at the centre of the rotating disc should run FASTER than the clock at the edge of the disc. Rather, the results in Section XII are all based on the Lorentz transformation which predicts RECIPROCAL time dilation for inertial observers - either observer sees the other observer's clock running SLOW. The Lorentz transformation does not predict anything about a system of two clocks one of which (the one at the edge of the disc) is not inertial.

Needless to say, relativity believers would never go to Section XII and see if the results there justify Divine Albert's claim that the clock at the center runs faster. They just sing "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity" and, when the ecstasy reaches its culmination, go into convulsions. If Divine Albert had said that it is the clock at the edge that runs faster, relativity believers would be just as ecstatic.

Pentcho Valev

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2015. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.