A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A question about the translated "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 13th 13, 07:01 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
Koobee Wublee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 815
Default A question about the translated "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"

Paul,

So, you think you understand gravitational red shift, eh? Here is the
issue. As the ever-so-humble Koobee Wublee who has managed to kick
Paul’s ass so hard in these recent encounters understands, the
frequency transformation (please, be more professional and no more
wave transforms, OK?) is not a simple tale of (1/dt) according to the
Lorentz transform. According to the spacetime geometry described by
the Schwarzschild metric, the only way to predict a gravitational red
shift is through (1/dt) term. See the inconsistency? Please help to
resolve this inconsistency. shrug

In the meantime, since Paul has refused to publish the results
concerning the twins’ paradox where both twins do travel away and
reunite with the same acceleration profile, the following definitely
would dash all hopes among the Einstein Dingleberries in trusting and
believing in a divine resolution to the paradox itself. As Paul has
demonstrated, it is a piece of cake to fudge the results in the
asymmetrical case where only one twin travels (experiencing all the
accelerations) away. The symmetrical case of the traveling twins
proves to be much more elusive for the Einstein Dingleberries to
brainstorm through. Naturally, Paul has found it to be a little bit
challenging to fudge the results. That is why he remains ever so
impotent when confronted with such excited revelation. shrug

The twins twins Paul Draper and Paul Andersen leave the earth at the
same time with instruction telling each when to stop accelerating and
when to start decelerating/accelerating to eventually reunite between
Paul^2 --- the exact same acceleration profile. Given an arbitrary
time period where there is no acceleration between these two buffoons,
the mutual time dilation should relentlessly build up according to the
Lorentz transform. Since the time period of the building up of mutual
time dilation is arbitrary, there is no possible brainstorming that
can fudge the results towards the mathemaGical realm of resolving the
twins’ paradox. shrug

CHECKMATE

Koobee Wublee will take lack of an answer as so. So, happy
brainstorming, Paul, and don’t forget to chase after the chickens in
your neck of the woods. :-)

Ahahahaha...,
Koobee Wublee

Reference:

On Mar 7, 12:20 am, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Mar 6, 10:54 am, "Paul B. Andersen" wrote:

Remember, phi is the angle observed in the source frame,
so you have to put yourself at the source.
So what do you see?
Lets use the compass.


S --------- 90
\ phi
\
\
\
O - v
| \
180 160


It is very necessary to understand exactly what variable means. Let’s
re-examine the temporal transformation of the Lorentz transform. As
the usual, any transform (Galilean, the Voigt, Larmor’s, or the
Lorentz) is a tale of 3 points where Point #1 and Point #2 are
observing Point #3.

** dt_1 = (dt_2 + [B_12] * d[s_23] / c) / sqrt(1 – B_12^2)

Or

** dt_1 = (dt_2 - [B_21] * d[s_23] / c) / sqrt(1 – B_21^2)

Or

** dt_2 = (dt_1 + [B_21] * d[s_13] / c) / sqrt(1 – B_21^2)

Or

** dt_2 = (dt_1 - [B_12] * d[s_13] / c) / sqrt(1 – B_12^2)

Where

** dt_1 = Time at #3 as observed by #1
** dt_2 = Time at #3 as observed by #2
** [s_13] = Displacement vector from #1 to #3
** [s_23] = Displacement vector from #2 to #3
** [B_12] c = Velocity of #2 as observed by #1
** [B_21] c = Velocity of #1 as observed by #2
** [] * [] = Dot product of two vectors

When the direction of travel of either #1 or #2 is in parallel with
the observed displacement segment, the above simplifies into the
following familiar form.

** dt’ = (dt – v dx / c^2) / sqrt(1 – v^2 / c^2)

Where

** dt’ = dt_1
** dt = dt_2
** v^2 = B_21^2 c^2
** dx = d[s_23]
** [b] * d[s] = sqrt(B^2 ds^2), [b] and d[s] in parallel

Koobee Wublee wants the discussion to stay in the form first mentioned
since that form is more difficult for one to play mathemagic tricks
and try to pull a fast one through the humanity.

Then, assuming the frequency is just the inverse of the time duration,
one can then write down the relativistic Doppler shift as the
following.

** f_1 = f_2 sqrt(1 – B_12^2) / (1 + [B_12] * [B_23])

Where

** f_1 = 1 / dt_1
** f_2 = 1 / dt_2
** [B_23] c = d[s_23] / dt_2

When Point #3 is light itself, B_23^2 = 1, and ([] * []) becomes your
cosine thing. Well, the equation above is obviously wrong since it
predicts the exact opposite from the classical Doppler effect. Also,
if you attempt to derive the Doppler effect from the Galilean
transform using this (1/dt) thing, you will get no Doppler effect. To
derive the classical Doppler effect, you must hold the wavelength
invariant.

So, how did Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar derive
the energy transformation from the Lorentz transform? If you don’t
know, you have no right to toss the equation around since you have no
way of controlling which parameter means what. shrug

Hint: Using the Lagrangian method, the following can be derived in
which all are equivalent. shrug

** f_1 = f_2 (1 + [B_12] * [B_23]) / sqrt(1 – B_12^2)

Or

** f_1 = f_2 (1 - [B_21] * [B_23]) / sqrt(1 – B_21^2)

Or

** f_1 = f_2 sqrt(1 – B_21^2) / (1 + [B_21] * [B_13])

Or

** f_1 = f_2 sqrt(1 – B_12^2) / (1 - [B_12] * [B_13])

  #2  
Old March 14th 13, 04:16 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
1treePetrifiedForestLane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 974
Default A question about the translated "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"

what is the idea, of having "symmetrical" accelerations
of both astronauts?

would you prefer "mirror" symmetry?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
just THREE YEARS AFTER my "CREWLESS Space Shuttle" article, theNSF """experts""" discover the idea of an unmanned Shuttle to fill the2010-2016 cargo-to-ISS (six+ years) GAP gaetanomarano Policy 3 September 15th 08 04:47 PM
and now, Ladies and Gentlemen, the NSF "slow motion experts" have(finally) "invented" MY "Multipurpose Orbital Rescue Vehicle"... just 20 gaetanomarano Policy 9 August 30th 08 12:05 AM
The "Venus/Mercury Radar Reflection Conjunction Anomaly", is a firm motive to question Special relativity and a support for the idea of "Planetary lightspeed frame dragging" by a so called LASOF. ( Local Anti-Symmetrical Oscillati [email protected][_2_] Misc 8 November 9th 07 06:57 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.