[TheForge] YAK relativity- WAY OT, or not...

Tue Jan 6 13:38:01 2004

If I'm understanding you, then you don't understand the observation * it's =
not an assumption * that the velocity of light in a vacuum is a constant.
=20
Think about sound waves in air.  (No wind.)   A whistle (pure sine wave, =
known freqency) is blowing - you hear it's pitch.  If it moves away from =
you, two things happen - it takes longer for the sound to get to you =
(because it has to travel farther) AND the sound drops in pitch (Doppler =
effect).  The SPEED of the sound through air is unchanged.
=20
Light works the same way, but doesn't require a medium to carry it - it's =
self-propagating.  (My understanding is that its electric field collapses =
generating a magnetic field, which, in turn, collapses, generating an =
electric field.)  That is to say, if the light source is moving away, the =
speed of the light is unchanged, but the frequency is lowered - a =
phenomenon known in physics as the "red shift" (also the Doppler effect).
=20
Bruce
NJ

>>> [email protected] 1/6/2004 11:04:38 AM >>>

>     For a good 20 years I've been thinking these particle physics
>     d00dz have needed to start from a clean sheet of paper.    Your
assumptions build your
>     world.

I like that last statement! Aint it the truth...

>Einstein's assumption was that C is the universal
>     limiting velocity.

That was the first thing I noticed during my study of special relativity- =
if
a light source is moving away from you, then the light emitted that is =
also
traveling away from you is moving at more than c relative to you. Duh!
=20
=20
=20

The only thing is that we don't seem to be able to sense the difference. I
wonder what would happen if we could accelerate that light source and have =
a
remote sensor that's stationary relative to us...I bet the light that
reached it would appear to be traveling at c, but what that means, I don't
know.
Whatever else is going on, only c or less is relevant to our daily
business...

>I've never found there to be any firm basis
>     for this.  The fact that he massaged the Lorentz transforms to
>     be consistent with this assumption does not prove that he was
>     correct.  It just means that be built a set of equations consistent
>     with his assumption.  I'm not saying he's wrong, but that I see
>     no proof that he is correct.  That empirical measurements confirm
>     several of the "predictions" implied in the theory doesn't prove
>     that the assumptions about C as ULV are correct.  They only prove
>     that bodies operating within the framework of his theory display
>     certain predicted behaviors.  The one does not necessarily imply
>     the other.

It's just that bodies seem to develop infinite mass as they approach c, so
it appears to be an absolute limitation. Again, if a body is moving away
from me at c minus 1%, and I'm moving away from it at 1 1/2 percent of c,
then the body is moving faster than light speed. Since all of relativity
depends upon frames of reference, it could be said that everything is =
moving
faster than light all the time. Or is one frame of reference superior to =
all
others?  Oh, No, Mr. Hands, my mind won't bend that way!!!!

I bet I'm not the first person to wonder about this.

>
>     About 25 years ago, several observatories discovered a group of
>     distant objects with red shifts equivalent to 7C and 21C.  As I
>     recall, those have not been explained as any equipment malfunction,
>     calibration error, or error in observation or calculation.
>
>     Can I accelerate a wrought iron particle beyond C?  I'd like to
>     think so. :)

Yes, you may. Can I watch?
Andy g.

_______________________________________________
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
theforge mail list group photo site is
http://www.photoaccess.com
Login:  [email protected]
password:  anvil
___________

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---