G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

What if like Einstien told us gravity and accelerating motion are
the same thing,and that goes also for inertia? Now we see in books
the playing card the king of hearts showing how thin we would get at
light speed,and every kind of clock would come to a stop. This is
viewed from a rest frame(not moving) observer. That is SR and so it
is written(in the books) We still have to ask is it happening inside
the space ship? We have no space ship going anywhere near that
speed. Lets go with the space ship accelerating at earth's gravity.
The people in the ship would know they are moving because they can
feel the same pressure(weight) they had on earth. After about 8
months they are at 87% of "C" Their clock has slowed down to half
the speed of earth's clock. They notice
nothing everything looks and feels the same,and my thoughts kick in
when the spaceship gets to just over 93% then I believe inertia,and
foreshortned comes into view. These astronauts will feel heavy (at
99.999999999 of "C" ) a 200 lb person (rest weight) would be 20,000
times heavier Two astronauts the same height one lying perpendicular
to the direction the space ship is going,and the other astronaut
lying in the same direction the spaceship is going,this astronaut
would be
noticeably shorter. Well here I"m going against relativity.(I'm
laughing) Going against Scott Well I gave them relativity right up
to
93% of "C" Still I'm going with what are great accelerators are
showing us. In Einstien day there were no accelerators,and he knew
of only two forces. That gives me a great advantage.To me it does
not seem
fair. But I like it anyway. Bert PS I have thoughts
and these groups give me a chance to tell what I think

Fair enough. That's what these groups are for, but you have to
realize that mainstream science has really gone far beyond where
you're at. It's gone far beyond me too. I haven't done anything
along those lines in recent years, but I did get through a course in
Special Relativity and an Independent Studies course in astronomy,
many years ago, now.
You have to realize that everybody in their own frame of reference
will feel perfectly normal. You see relativistic effects, like
Lorentz contraction, in "other" frames of reference, but an
hypothetical astronaut travelling at 93% C should not "feel heavier."
Since he's at rest with respect to himself and so no effect is
apparent. To him the rest of the universe is shortened, since it has
a *relative* velocity in the other direction. He gets where he's
going very quickly in his, (or her), time frame because the clock on
board the near-light-speed ship runs more slowly than one at rest,
But it's not apparent to that astronaut inside the ship. All she/he
knows is that the trip didn't take long at all, but if he/she turns
around and goes back, then many years will have past on her/his home
planet, while the astronaut will still be young... well younger than
if she/he had not made the trip.
So time, in this sense is not absolute,... it's "relative." So is
mass and dimensionality. Mass and dimensionality are returned to
normal when velocities are matched again, but time seems to hold the
balance of accounts.

I do want to add that there is a small difference between gravity and
acceleration. With gravity the force is directed to a point, so it's
radial, (or perhaps more correctly "centric"), in direction whereas
acceleration is an apparent force normal to a plane. Hence Gravity
will have tidal effects and linear acceleration will have none. Did
I get that right?



--
Regards
Fred

Remove FFFf to reply, please