Fallacious Notion of Inertial Reference Frames in Relativity

1. Valid Coordinate Reference Frames
----------------------------------------
1.1 Ideally, a reference frame is a set of space coordinates, which
is fixed in some defined way. Let us consider a closed volume V of
space containing a system of N particles of matter in all possible
physical states. We consider the closed volume of space in the sense
that there is no transfer of mass or energy across the boundary
surface of this volume and the enclosed particles do not experience
any significant force or interaction from outside this volume. Let
point A be the center of mass of these N particles and let K be a non-
rotating Cartesian coordinate reference frame with its origin located
at point A. In this reference frame K, let the positions of all N
particles be defined to be certain function of time (x_i(t), y_i(t),
z_i(t)), provided they remain bounded within the closed volume V.
Since K is a reference frame with origin at the center of mass of the
enclosed N particles, it is generally referred as a Center of Mass
(CoM) Reference Frame. In a CoM reference frame total momentum of all
of its domain particles is zero.

1.2 Obviously within the closed volume V under consideration, the
total momentum and the total mass-energy content of the given N
particles will be conserved. We may refer this set of N particles to
any coordinate reference frame for quantifying or assigning certain
measure numbers to the relative positions of these particles, but that
must not alter the physical state (e.g. pressure and temperature
distribution) or content of matter (e.g. mass-energy content) within
the closed volume (or the domain volume) V under consideration. This
requirement may be treated as a physical constraint on the choice of
valid coordinate reference frames.

1.3 Out of all other inertial reference frames, which could be
constructed for referring the positions and velocities of given N
particles within the closed volume V, the total mass-energy content
measured in a CoM reference frame is the minimum. Hence a CoM
reference frame may be considered as an absolute or fixed or the
preferred reference frame for the given N particles contained within a
closed volume V. This is the fundamental notion of an absolute
reference frame in relation to matter contained within a closed volume
of space. Since the domain particles of the reference frame K do not
experience any significant force or interaction from outside its
domain volume, the center of mass and hence the origin A of reference
frame K will continue to remain in its state of rest or of uniform
motion in the external space outside its domain volume. Hence the
reference frame K can also be regarded as a unique, fixed Inertial
Reference frame for the closed volume under consideration.

2. International Celestial Reference System
-----------------------------------------------
2.1 As a consequence of the IAU 2000 resolutions, the old celestial
dynamical reference system, materialized by the FK5, is replaced by
the International Celestial Reference System (ICRS), which consists of
the Barycentric Celestial Reference Frame (BCRF) and the Geocentric
Celestial Reference Frame (GCRF), both kinematically defined by the
position of same extragalactic radio sources. The origin of space
coordinates defining BCRF is located at the barycenter or the CoM of
our solar system. The origin of space coordinates defining GCRF is
located at the geocenter or the CoM of the Earth system. Here BCRF
can be regarded as an absolute or fixed reference frame in relation to
the solar system whereas the GCRF, being a subset of BCRF, can be
regarded as a local reference frame in relation to the solar system.
The task of establishing and maintaining the ICRS and its components
has been assigned to the International Earth Rotation and Reference
Systems Service (IERS).

3. Principle of Relativity
-------------------------
3.1 As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference
frames that move with uniform velocity with respect to one another,
are defined as Inertial Reference Frames. The origins of all inertial
reference frames will therefore move in straight lines. All laws of
Nature describing physical phenomenon will essentially have the same
form and be equally valid in all inertial reference frames. All
inertial reference frames constitute a group and no particular member
of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.

4. Critical Observations on Relativity Principle
---------------------------------------------------
4.1 Whereas the principle of relativity gave us the impression that
infinitely many inertial reference frames (IRF) are available to the
user for use as per convenience; the elaborate arrangements required
for establishing just one reference frame, the BCRF, must be a bit
perplexing to all of us. Probably the notion of inertial reference
frames, in relative uniform motion, is too simplistic, vague and
misconstrued. Let us examine this notion critically.

(a) Why should reference frames be required to move at all?
Logically it is the particles of matter that are expected to move in a
reference frame. Primarily the reference frames are required for
quantifying the positions of various particles located in a given
region of space. A reference frame with its origin fixed at the CoM
of all the particles in the given region of space, is sufficient to
quantify the positions of all such particles. We just don't need a
large number of reference frames in relative uniform motion to
quantify the positions of given set of particles. Imagine how stupid
it will look if the IERS created 10 more celestial reference frames in
relative uniform motion with respect to the BCRF.

(b) Why do we need very many reference frames?
For studying the kinematic motion and dynamic interactions of an
infinitely large number of particles located in a given region of
space (of closed volume V), we need to reference their positions to a
single CoM reference frame (like BCRF for the solar system). If we
create a separate reference frame for each particle (with its origin
located at the center of that particle) the very objective of creating
a reference frame will be lost. However, some local reference frames
(like GCRF in the solar system) could always be created for the
convenience of practical measurements of positions and velocities,
provided such local measurements could ultimately be transformed to
the fixed CoM reference frame.

(c) Can many IRF in relative motion be under acceleration in BCRF?
As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference frames that
move with uniform velocity with respect to one another, are defined as
Inertial Reference Frames. Let us consider three space ships
S1,S2,S3, moving within our solar system with relative uniform
velocity with respect to one another. Further let us associate
reference frames K1, K2, K3 with these space ships so that these
reference frames also move with relative uniform velocity with respect
to one another. Therefore, in accordance with relativity principle,
these reference frames K1, K2, K3 will be defined as inertial
reference frames. But apart from relative uniform velocity between
S1S2, S2S3, S1S3, all three space ships S1,S2,S3, could also be
moving under common gravitational acceleration in BCRF towards the
barycenter of the solar system. Hence we find that inertial reference
frames defined as per relativity principle could actually be moving
under accelerated motion in a CoM or fixed reference frame. As such
the very notion of inertial reference frames under uniform relative
motion is ambiguous, vague, impractical and misleading. Apparently
this notion was introduced just for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments.

(d) Why do we need to locate fictitious observers on each IRF?
Actually the notion of fictitious observers is as ambiguous and
misleading as the notion of IRF. Modern advancements in technology
have replaced the fictitious observers with advanced electronic
instrumentation while the real observers watch the computer displays
to observe the process. For example the position and velocity
measurements of a spacecraft are first recorded in the local reference
frame of instrumentation and then transformed to the CoM fixed frame
of the solar system, the BCRF.

(e) Can relative measurements alone yield correct information?
No, the relative measurements alone cannot yield true information
regarding position and velocity measurements of particles in the
relevant region of space under consideration. To illustrate this
point let us consider two space ships S1 and S2 moving in the solar
system. Let their position vectors in BCRF be R1 and R2 and their
velocity vectors be V1 and V2 respectively. The dynamic motion of
these space ships will obviously be governed by the parameters R1, R2
and V1, V2 . Now the relative separation between S1 and S2 will be
given by R_12 = R2 - R1 and the relative velocity between them will
be given by V_12 = V2 - V1. If we use only relative coordinates
and measure only the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 (without
using BCRF) we find that the dynamic motion of the two space ships is
not governed by the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 . Hence it is
quite obvious that the relative measurements alone do not provide the
complete information as required.

5. Relative Measurements
---------------------------
5.1 Let us now elaborate some relevant aspects of the relative
measurements with or without the use of Inertial Reference Frames.
The term 'relative measurement' of object B with respect to a
reference frame K1 implies the measurement of position and velocity of
B relative to the origin A1 of reference frame K1. There are two
special cases of these relative measurements depending on the state of
the origin A1 of reference frame K1.

(i) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
frame K1 are known with respect to the relevant CoM reference frame,
then the relative measurements in K1 can be regarded as local
measurements, with K1 known as a local reference frame. Such local
measurements constitute a necessary step in establishing the absolute
measurements in the relevant CoM fixed reference frame like the
BCRF. For example, the relative measurement of position and velocity
of Pioneer type spacecraft from the deep space network (DSN) stations
constitute such a local measurement.

(ii) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
frame K1 are not known with respect to the relevant CoM reference
frame, then all measurements in K1 can be regarded as purely
relative measurements, with K1 known as a relative reference frame.
If the origins A1 and A2 of two such relative reference frames K1
and K2 are known to be moving with a uniform relative velocity with
respect to each other, then these relative reference frames will be
known as Inertial Reference Frames of Special Relativity fame. As per
the relativity principle, all IRF constitute a group and no particular
member of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.
However, since a CoM fixed reference frame like BCRF can be considered
a preferred reference frame for the relevant region of space, it
cannot be regarded as a member of the IRF group. Hence it can be
easily seen that a group of IRF can neither be practically defined or
established in physical space nor be used for real practical
measurements. Such a group of inertial reference frames is only a
hypothetical construct used for erecting an equally hypothetical
castle of Special Theory of Relativity (SR).

5.2 Finally we may conclude that a CoM reference frame may be
considered as an absolute or fixed or the preferred reference frame
for the given N particles contained within a closed volume of space.
The measurements in a convenient local reference frame constitute a
necessary step for establishing the absolute measurements in a
relevant CoM fixed reference frame. Relative measurements alone,
without reference to a CoM fixed reference frame can give misleading
results. For example, relative measurement of position and velocity
of a uniformly moving spacecraft, from the DSN stations may indicate
as if the spacecraft is periodically accelerating towards or away from
the DSN stations, which is highly misleading. Purely relative
reference frames, popularly known as inertial reference frames in SR
parlance, are only useful for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments and hence constitute a practically redundant notion.

To summarize, I have shown that a CoM reference frame for a certain
closed volume of space (with certain matter content), is a unique or
special reference frame (K0) , like BCRF for our solar system. The
assertion that this CoM reference frame is indeed unique, special,
preferred and 'absolute' for the closed volume of space under
consideration (like our solar system) is based on the following facts.

(a) Total kinetic energy (hence total mass-energy content) is a
minima in this CoM reference frame, in comparison with any other
reference frame (which is not at rest in this CoM reference frame)
including all so called Inertial Reference Frames (IRF) in relative
uniform motion w.r.t. one another. This confirms that the SR notion
of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(b) Total linear momentum of all particles enclosed within this
closed volume of space is zero in the CoM reference frame which is non-
zero in all other IRF. This again confirms that the SR notion of the
equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(c) Within the closed volume of space under consideration, the CoM
reference frame is in fact the only true inertial reference frame
which can be practically established (like BCRF) and in which Newton's
laws of motion strictly hold. For example for tracking and modeling
the trajectory of a spacecraft, all measurements *must* be referred to
the BCRF, which is a CoM reference frame for the solar system. This
again confirms that the SR notion of the equivalence all IRF is
fallacious.

(d) As explained at para 4(e) above, unless we make use of CoM
reference frame, the position and velocity measurements (of any object
located within the closed volume of space under consideration) made in
any of the so called IRF are incomplete and *cannot* be used directly
in dynamical equations of motion. This again confirms that the SR
notion of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

Once we find that the measurements made in IRF (without reference to
CoM reference frame) are incomplete and the notion of equivalence of
all IRF is fallacious, it obviously follows that the notion of
Lorentz transformation for measurements in different IRF is equally
fallacious. Further, the speed of light c can be assumed to be
constant within the CoM reference frame. There is absolutely no need
to first *assume* the existence of hypothetical 'inertial reference
frames' in relative uniform motion w.r.t. one another and then to
*assume* the constancy of speed of light in all such hypothetical
frames.

GSS

"GSS" wrote in message
...
1. Valid Coordinate Reference Frames
----------------------------------------
1.1 Ideally, a reference frame is a set of space coordinates, which
is fixed in some defined way. Let us consider a closed volume V of
space containing a system of N particles of matter in all possible
physical states. We consider the closed volume of space in the sense
that there is no transfer of mass or energy across the boundary
surface of this volume and the enclosed particles do not experience
any significant force or interaction from outside this volume. Let
point A be the center of mass of these N particles and let K be a non-
rotating Cartesian coordinate reference frame with its origin located
at point A. In this reference frame K, let the positions of all N
particles be defined to be certain function of time (x_i(t), y_i(t),
z_i(t)), provided they remain bounded within the closed volume V.
Since K is a reference frame with origin at the center of mass of the
enclosed N particles, it is generally referred as a Center of Mass
(CoM) Reference Frame. In a CoM reference frame total momentum of all
of its domain particles is zero.

1.2 Obviously within the closed volume V under consideration, the
total momentum and the total mass-energy content of the given N
particles will be conserved. We may refer this set of N particles to
any coordinate reference frame for quantifying or assigning certain
measure numbers to the relative positions of these particles, but that
must not alter the physical state (e.g. pressure and temperature
distribution) or content of matter (e.g. mass-energy content) within
the closed volume (or the domain volume) V under consideration. This
requirement may be treated as a physical constraint on the choice of
valid coordinate reference frames.

1.3 Out of all other inertial reference frames, which could be
constructed for referring the positions and velocities of given N
particles within the closed volume V, the total mass-energy content
measured in a CoM reference frame is the minimum. Hence a CoM
reference frame may be considered as an absolute or fixed or the
preferred reference frame for the given N particles contained within a
closed volume V. This is the fundamental notion of an absolute
reference frame in relation to matter contained within a closed volume
of space. Since the domain particles of the reference frame K do not
experience any significant force or interaction from outside its
domain volume, the center of mass and hence the origin A of reference
frame K will continue to remain in its state of rest or of uniform
motion in the external space outside its domain volume. Hence the
reference frame K can also be regarded as a unique, fixed Inertial
Reference frame for the closed volume under consideration.

2. International Celestial Reference System
-----------------------------------------------
2.1 As a consequence of the IAU 2000 resolutions, the old celestial
dynamical reference system, materialized by the FK5, is replaced by
the International Celestial Reference System (ICRS), which consists of
the Barycentric Celestial Reference Frame (BCRF) and the Geocentric
Celestial Reference Frame (GCRF), both kinematically defined by the
position of same extragalactic radio sources. The origin of space
coordinates defining BCRF is located at the barycenter or the CoM of
our solar system. The origin of space coordinates defining GCRF is
located at the geocenter or the CoM of the Earth system. Here BCRF
can be regarded as an absolute or fixed reference frame in relation to
the solar system whereas the GCRF, being a subset of BCRF, can be
regarded as a local reference frame in relation to the solar system.
The task of establishing and maintaining the ICRS and its components
has been assigned to the International Earth Rotation and Reference
Systems Service (IERS).

3. Principle of Relativity
-------------------------
3.1 As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference
frames that move with uniform velocity with respect to one another,
are defined as Inertial Reference Frames. The origins of all inertial
reference frames will therefore move in straight lines. All laws of
Nature describing physical phenomenon will essentially have the same
form and be equally valid in all inertial reference frames. All
inertial reference frames constitute a group and no particular member
of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.

4. Critical Observations on Relativity Principle
---------------------------------------------------
4.1 Whereas the principle of relativity gave us the impression that
infinitely many inertial reference frames (IRF) are available to the
user for use as per convenience; the elaborate arrangements required
for establishing just one reference frame, the BCRF, must be a bit
perplexing to all of us. Probably the notion of inertial reference
frames, in relative uniform motion, is too simplistic, vague and
misconstrued. Let us examine this notion critically.

(a) Why should reference frames be required to move at all?
Logically it is the particles of matter that are expected to move in a
reference frame. Primarily the reference frames are required for
quantifying the positions of various particles located in a given
region of space. A reference frame with its origin fixed at the CoM
of all the particles in the given region of space, is sufficient to
quantify the positions of all such particles. We just don't need a
large number of reference frames in relative uniform motion to
quantify the positions of given set of particles. Imagine how stupid
it will look if the IERS created 10 more celestial reference frames in
relative uniform motion with respect to the BCRF.

(b) Why do we need very many reference frames?
For studying the kinematic motion and dynamic interactions of an
infinitely large number of particles located in a given region of
space (of closed volume V), we need to reference their positions to a
single CoM reference frame (like BCRF for the solar system). If we
create a separate reference frame for each particle (with its origin
located at the center of that particle) the very objective of creating
a reference frame will be lost. However, some local reference frames
(like GCRF in the solar system) could always be created for the
convenience of practical measurements of positions and velocities,
provided such local measurements could ultimately be transformed to
the fixed CoM reference frame.

(c) Can many IRF in relative motion be under acceleration in BCRF?
As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference frames that
move with uniform velocity with respect to one another, are defined as
Inertial Reference Frames. Let us consider three space ships
S1,S2,S3, moving within our solar system with relative uniform
velocity with respect to one another. Further let us associate
reference frames K1, K2, K3 with these space ships so that these
reference frames also move with relative uniform velocity with respect
to one another. Therefore, in accordance with relativity principle,
these reference frames K1, K2, K3 will be defined as inertial
reference frames. But apart from relative uniform velocity between
S1S2, S2S3, S1S3, all three space ships S1,S2,S3, could also be
moving under common gravitational acceleration in BCRF towards the
barycenter of the solar system. Hence we find that inertial reference
frames defined as per relativity principle could actually be moving
under accelerated motion in a CoM or fixed reference frame. As such
the very notion of inertial reference frames under uniform relative
motion is ambiguous, vague, impractical and misleading. Apparently
this notion was introduced just for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments.

(d) Why do we need to locate fictitious observers on each IRF?
Actually the notion of fictitious observers is as ambiguous and
misleading as the notion of IRF. Modern advancements in technology
have replaced the fictitious observers with advanced electronic
instrumentation while the real observers watch the computer displays
to observe the process. For example the position and velocity
measurements of a spacecraft are first recorded in the local reference
frame of instrumentation and then transformed to the CoM fixed frame
of the solar system, the BCRF.

(e) Can relative measurements alone yield correct information?
No, the relative measurements alone cannot yield true information
regarding position and velocity measurements of particles in the
relevant region of space under consideration. To illustrate this
point let us consider two space ships S1 and S2 moving in the solar
system. Let their position vectors in BCRF be R1 and R2 and their
velocity vectors be V1 and V2 respectively. The dynamic motion of
these space ships will obviously be governed by the parameters R1, R2
and V1, V2 . Now the relative separation between S1 and S2 will be
given by R_12 = R2 - R1 and the relative velocity between them will
be given by V_12 = V2 - V1. If we use only relative coordinates
and measure only the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 (without
using BCRF) we find that the dynamic motion of the two space ships is
not governed by the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 . Hence it is
quite obvious that the relative measurements alone do not provide the
complete information as required.

5. Relative Measurements
---------------------------
5.1 Let us now elaborate some relevant aspects of the relative
measurements with or without the use of Inertial Reference Frames.
The term 'relative measurement' of object B with respect to a
reference frame K1 implies the measurement of position and velocity of
B relative to the origin A1 of reference frame K1. There are two
special cases of these relative measurements depending on the state of
the origin A1 of reference frame K1.

(i) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
frame K1 are known with respect to the relevant CoM reference frame,
then the relative measurements in K1 can be regarded as local
measurements, with K1 known as a local reference frame. Such local
measurements constitute a necessary step in establishing the absolute
measurements in the relevant CoM fixed reference frame like the
BCRF. For example, the relative measurement of position and velocity
of Pioneer type spacecraft from the deep space network (DSN) stations
constitute such a local measurement.

(ii) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
frame K1 are not known with respect to the relevant CoM reference
frame, then all measurements in K1 can be regarded as purely
relative measurements, with K1 known as a relative reference frame.
If the origins A1 and A2 of two such relative reference frames K1
and K2 are known to be moving with a uniform relative velocity with
respect to each other, then these relative reference frames will be
known as Inertial Reference Frames of Special Relativity fame. As per
the relativity principle, all IRF constitute a group and no particular
member of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.
However, since a CoM fixed reference frame like BCRF can be considered
a preferred reference frame for the relevant region of space, it
cannot be regarded as a member of the IRF group. Hence it can be
easily seen that a group of IRF can neither be practically defined or
established in physical space nor be used for real practical
measurements. Such a group of inertial reference frames is only a
hypothetical construct used for erecting an equally hypothetical
castle of Special Theory of Relativity (SR).

5.2 Finally we may conclude that a CoM reference frame may be
considered as an absolute or fixed or the preferred reference frame
for the given N particles contained within a closed volume of space.
The measurements in a convenient local reference frame constitute a
necessary step for establishing the absolute measurements in a
relevant CoM fixed reference frame. Relative measurements alone,
without reference to a CoM fixed reference frame can give misleading
results. For example, relative measurement of position and velocity
of a uniformly moving spacecraft, from the DSN stations may indicate
as if the spacecraft is periodically accelerating towards or away from
the DSN stations, which is highly misleading. Purely relative
reference frames, popularly known as inertial reference frames in SR
parlance, are only useful for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments and hence constitute a practically redundant notion.

To summarize, I have shown that a CoM reference frame for a certain
closed volume of space (with certain matter content), is a unique or
special reference frame (K0) , like BCRF for our solar system. The
assertion that this CoM reference frame is indeed unique, special,
preferred and 'absolute' for the closed volume of space under
consideration (like our solar system) is based on the following facts.

(a) Total kinetic energy (hence total mass-energy content) is a
minima in this CoM reference frame, in comparison with any other
reference frame (which is not at rest in this CoM reference frame)
including all so called Inertial Reference Frames (IRF) in relative
uniform motion w.r.t. one another. This confirms that the SR notion
of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(b) Total linear momentum of all particles enclosed within this
closed volume of space is zero in the CoM reference frame which is non-
zero in all other IRF. This again confirms that the SR notion of the
equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(c) Within the closed volume of space under consideration, the CoM
reference frame is in fact the only true inertial reference frame
which can be practically established (like BCRF) and in which Newton's
laws of motion strictly hold. For example for tracking and modeling
the trajectory of a spacecraft, all measurements *must* be referred to
the BCRF, which is a CoM reference frame for the solar system. This
again confirms that the SR notion of the equivalence all IRF is
fallacious.

(d) As explained at para 4(e) above, unless we make use of CoM
reference frame, the position and velocity measurements (of any object
located within the closed volume of space under consideration) made in
any of the so called IRF are incomplete and *cannot* be used directly
in dynamical equations of motion. This again confirms that the SR
notion of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

Once we find that the measurements made in IRF (without reference to
CoM reference frame) are incomplete and the notion of equivalence of
all IRF is fallacious, it obviously follows that the notion of
Lorentz transformation for measurements in different IRF is equally
fallacious. Further, the speed of light c can be assumed to be
constant within the CoM reference frame. There is absolutely no need
to first *assume* the existence of hypothetical 'inertial reference
frames' in relative uniform motion w.r.t. one another and then to
*assume* the constancy of speed of light in all such hypothetical
frames.

How do you know all this?


--
Martin Hogbin

Martin Hogbin wrote:
"GSS" wrote in message
...
.........
5.2 Finally we may conclude that a CoM reference frame may be
considered as an absolute or fixed or the preferred reference frame
for the given N particles contained within a closed volume of space.
The measurements in a convenient local reference frame constitute a
necessary step for establishing the absolute measurements in a
relevant CoM fixed reference frame. Relative measurements alone,
without reference to a CoM fixed reference frame can give misleading
results. For example, relative measurement of position and velocity
of a uniformly moving spacecraft, from the DSN stations may indicate
as if the spacecraft is periodically accelerating towards or away from
the DSN stations, which is highly misleading. Purely relative
reference frames, popularly known as inertial reference frames in SR
parlance, are only useful for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments and hence constitute a practically redundant notion.

To summarize, I have shown that a CoM reference frame for a certain
closed volume of space (with certain matter content), is a unique or
special reference frame (K0) , like BCRF for our solar system. The
assertion that this CoM reference frame is indeed unique, special,
preferred and 'absolute' for the closed volume of space under
consideration (like our solar system) is based on the following facts.

(a) Total kinetic energy (hence total mass-energy content) is a
minima in this CoM reference frame, in comparison with any other
reference frame (which is not at rest in this CoM reference frame)
including all so called Inertial Reference Frames (IRF) in relative
uniform motion w.r.t. one another. This confirms that the SR notion
of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(b) Total linear momentum of all particles enclosed within this
closed volume of space is zero in the CoM reference frame which is non-
zero in all other IRF. This again confirms that the SR notion of the
equivalence of all IRF is fallacious.

(c) Within the closed volume of space under consideration, the CoM
reference frame is in fact the only true inertial reference frame
which can be practically established (like BCRF) and in which Newton's
laws of motion strictly hold. For example for tracking and modeling
the trajectory of a spacecraft, all measurements *must* be referred to
the BCRF, which is a CoM reference frame for the solar system. This
again confirms that the SR notion of the equivalence of all IRF is
fallacious.

(d) As explained at para 4(e) above, unless we make use of CoM
reference frame, the position and velocity measurements (of any object
located within the closed volume of space under consideration) made in
any of the so called IRF are incomplete and *cannot* be used directly
in dynamical equations of motion. This again confirms that the SR
notion of the equivalence of all IRF is fallacious.

Once we find that the measurements made in IRF (without reference to
CoM reference frame) are incomplete and the notion of equivalence of
all IRF is fallacious, it obviously follows that the notion of
Lorentz transformation for measurements in different IRF is equally
fallacious. Further, the speed of light c can be assumed to be
constant within the CoM reference frame. There is absolutely no need
to first *assume* the existence of hypothetical 'inertial reference
frames' in relative uniform motion w.r.t. one another and then to
*assume* the constancy of speed of light in all such hypothetical
frames.

How do you know all this?
--
Martin Hogbin

For this I had to do a lot of study and introspection. What
impressed me most was the detailed process of establishing the
International Celestial Reference System (ICRS).
http://www.iers.org/MainDisp.csl?pid=96-107
The task of establishing and maintaining the ICRS and its components
has been assigned to the International Earth Rotation and Reference
Systems Service (IERS).
http://www.iers.org/MainDisp.csl?pid=14-36
Major components of IERS include Technique Centers, Product Centers
and Combination Centers. The main contributing observational
techniques used are, International GNSS Service (IGS), International
Laser Ranging Service (ILRS),
International VLBI Service (IVS) and International DORIS Service
(IDS).

What astonished me most was the tremendous amount of international
cooperation and effort required to establish and maintain the
celestial reference frames. I could not help comparing the ICRS with
the inertial reference frames of SR which could be just assumed in a
jiffy and made to fly around like fairies in fairy tales. And the
resulting introspection convinced me that the so called inertial
reference frames of SR are just hypothetical entities fit only for
carrying out thought experiments.

Of course, now I am also convinced that even a universal or absolute
reference frame could be established as well as the ICRS, provided a
similar international effort is put in.
http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...rsal_frame.pdf

GSS

On Jan 10, 7:49 am, GSS wrote:
Martin Hogbin wrote:
"GSS" wrote in message
...
........
5.2 Finally we may conclude that a CoM reference frame may be
considered as an absolute or fixed or the preferred reference frame
for the given N particles contained within a closed volume of space.
The measurements in a convenient local reference frame constitute a
necessary step for establishing the absolute measurements in a
relevant CoM fixed reference frame. Relative measurements alone,
without reference to a CoM fixed reference frame can give misleading
results. For example, relative measurement of position and velocity
of a uniformly moving spacecraft, from the DSN stations may indicate
as if the spacecraft is periodically accelerating towards or away from
the DSN stations, which is highly misleading. Purely relative
reference frames, popularly known as inertial reference frames in SR
parlance, are only useful for conducting hypothetical thought
experiments and hence constitute a practically redundant notion.

To summarize, I have shown that a CoM reference frame for a certain
closed volume of space (with certain matter content), is a unique or
special reference frame (K0) , like BCRF for our solar system. The
assertion that this CoM reference frame is indeed unique, special,
preferred and 'absolute' for the closed volume of space under
consideration (like our solar system) is based on the following facts.

(a) Total kinetic energy (hence total mass-energy content) is a
minima in this CoM reference frame, in comparison with any other
reference frame (which is not at rest in this CoM reference frame)
including all so called Inertial Reference Frames (IRF) in relative
uniform motion w.r.t. one another. This confirms that the SR notion
of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.

(b) Total linear momentum of all particles enclosed within this
closed volume of space is zero in the CoM reference frame which is non-
zero in all other IRF. This again confirms that the SR notion of the
equivalence of all IRF is fallacious.

(c) Within the closed volume of space under consideration, the CoM
reference frame is in fact the only true inertial reference frame
which can be practically established (like BCRF) and in which Newton's
laws of motion strictly hold. For example for tracking and modeling
the trajectory of a spacecraft, all measurements *must* be referred to
the BCRF, which is a CoM reference frame for the solar system. This
again confirms that the SR notion of the equivalence of all IRF is
fallacious.

(d) As explained at para 4(e) above, unless we make use of CoM
reference frame, the position and velocity measurements (of any object
located within the closed volume of space under consideration) made in
any of the so called IRF are incomplete and *cannot* be used directly
in dynamical equations of motion. This again confirms that the SR
notion of the equivalence of all IRF is fallacious.

Once we find that the measurements made in IRF (without reference to
CoM reference frame) are incomplete and the notion of equivalence of
all IRF is fallacious, it obviously follows that the notion of
Lorentz transformation for measurements in different IRF is equally
fallacious. Further, the speed of light c can be assumed to be
constant within the CoM reference frame. There is absolutely no need
to first *assume* the existence of hypothetical 'inertial reference
frames' in relative uniform motion w.r.t. one another and then to
*assume* the constancy of speed of light in all such hypothetical
frames.

How do you know all this?
--
Martin Hogbin

For this I had to do a lot of study and introspection. What
impressed me most was the detailed process of establishing the
International Celestial Reference System (ICRS).http://www.iers.org/MainDisp.csl?pid=96-107
The task of establishing and maintaining the ICRS and its components
has been assigned to the International Earth Rotation and Reference
Systems Service (IERS).http://www.iers.org/MainDisp.csl?pid=14-36
Major components of IERS include Technique Centers, Product Centers
and Combination Centers. The main contributing observational
techniques used are, International GNSS Service (IGS), International
Laser Ranging Service (ILRS),
International VLBI Service (IVS) and International DORIS Service
(IDS).

What astonished me most was the tremendous amount of international
cooperation and effort required to establish and maintain the
celestial reference frames. I could not help comparing the ICRS with
the inertial reference frames of SR which could be just assumed in a
jiffy and made to fly around like fairies in fairy tales. And the
resulting introspection convinced me that the so called inertial
reference frames of SR are just hypothetical entities fit only for
carrying out thought experiments.

Of course, now I am also convinced that even a universal or absolute
reference frame could be established as well as the ICRS, provided a
similar international effort is put in.http://www.geocities.com/gurcharn_sa...rsal_frame.pdf

GSS

That's a new one.

"We can have an absolute reference frame if only we work at it real
hard."

Isn't it time for you to find a new hobby?

"Martin Hogbin" wrote in message
...
:
: "GSS" wrote in message
: ...
: 1. Valid Coordinate Reference Frames
: ----------------------------------------
: 1.1 Ideally, a reference frame is a set of space coordinates, which
: is fixed in some defined way. Let us consider a closed volume V of
: space containing a system of N particles of matter in all possible
: physical states. We consider the closed volume of space in the sense
: that there is no transfer of mass or energy across the boundary
: surface of this volume and the enclosed particles do not experience
: any significant force or interaction from outside this volume. Let
: point A be the center of mass of these N particles and let K be a non-
: rotating Cartesian coordinate reference frame with its origin located
: at point A. In this reference frame K, let the positions of all N
: particles be defined to be certain function of time (x_i(t), y_i(t),
: z_i(t)), provided they remain bounded within the closed volume V.
: Since K is a reference frame with origin at the center of mass of the
: enclosed N particles, it is generally referred as a Center of Mass
: (CoM) Reference Frame. In a CoM reference frame total momentum of all
: of its domain particles is zero.
:
: 1.2 Obviously within the closed volume V under consideration, the
: total momentum and the total mass-energy content of the given N
: particles will be conserved. We may refer this set of N particles to
: any coordinate reference frame for quantifying or assigning certain
: measure numbers to the relative positions of these particles, but that
: must not alter the physical state (e.g. pressure and temperature
: distribution) or content of matter (e.g. mass-energy content) within
: the closed volume (or the domain volume) V under consideration. This
: requirement may be treated as a physical constraint on the choice of
: valid coordinate reference frames.
:
: 1.3 Out of all other inertial reference frames, which could be
: constructed for referring the positions and velocities of given N
: particles within the closed volume V, the total mass-energy content
: measured in a CoM reference frame is the minimum. Hence a CoM
: reference frame may be considered as an absolute or fixed or the
: preferred reference frame for the given N particles contained within a
: closed volume V. This is the fundamental notion of an absolute
: reference frame in relation to matter contained within a closed volume
: of space. Since the domain particles of the reference frame K do not
: experience any significant force or interaction from outside its
: domain volume, the center of mass and hence the origin A of reference
: frame K will continue to remain in its state of rest or of uniform
: motion in the external space outside its domain volume. Hence the
: reference frame K can also be regarded as a unique, fixed Inertial
: Reference frame for the closed volume under consideration.
:
: 2. International Celestial Reference System
: -----------------------------------------------
: 2.1 As a consequence of the IAU 2000 resolutions, the old celestial
: dynamical reference system, materialized by the FK5, is replaced by
: the International Celestial Reference System (ICRS), which consists of
: the Barycentric Celestial Reference Frame (BCRF) and the Geocentric
: Celestial Reference Frame (GCRF), both kinematically defined by the
: position of same extragalactic radio sources. The origin of space
: coordinates defining BCRF is located at the barycenter or the CoM of
: our solar system. The origin of space coordinates defining GCRF is
: located at the geocenter or the CoM of the Earth system. Here BCRF
: can be regarded as an absolute or fixed reference frame in relation to
: the solar system whereas the GCRF, being a subset of BCRF, can be
: regarded as a local reference frame in relation to the solar system.
: The task of establishing and maintaining the ICRS and its components
: has been assigned to the International Earth Rotation and Reference
: Systems Service (IERS).
:
: 3. Principle of Relativity
: -------------------------
: 3.1 As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference
: frames that move with uniform velocity with respect to one another,
: are defined as Inertial Reference Frames. The origins of all inertial
: reference frames will therefore move in straight lines. All laws of
: Nature describing physical phenomenon will essentially have the same
: form and be equally valid in all inertial reference frames. All
: inertial reference frames constitute a group and no particular member
: of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.
:
: 4. Critical Observations on Relativity Principle
: ---------------------------------------------------
: 4.1 Whereas the principle of relativity gave us the impression that
: infinitely many inertial reference frames (IRF) are available to the
: user for use as per convenience; the elaborate arrangements required
: for establishing just one reference frame, the BCRF, must be a bit
: perplexing to all of us. Probably the notion of inertial reference
: frames, in relative uniform motion, is too simplistic, vague and
: misconstrued. Let us examine this notion critically.
:
: (a) Why should reference frames be required to move at all?
: Logically it is the particles of matter that are expected to move in a
: reference frame. Primarily the reference frames are required for
: quantifying the positions of various particles located in a given
: region of space. A reference frame with its origin fixed at the CoM
: of all the particles in the given region of space, is sufficient to
: quantify the positions of all such particles. We just don't need a
: large number of reference frames in relative uniform motion to
: quantify the positions of given set of particles. Imagine how stupid
: it will look if the IERS created 10 more celestial reference frames in
: relative uniform motion with respect to the BCRF.
:
: (b) Why do we need very many reference frames?
: For studying the kinematic motion and dynamic interactions of an
: infinitely large number of particles located in a given region of
: space (of closed volume V), we need to reference their positions to a
: single CoM reference frame (like BCRF for the solar system). If we
: create a separate reference frame for each particle (with its origin
: located at the center of that particle) the very objective of creating
: a reference frame will be lost. However, some local reference frames
: (like GCRF in the solar system) could always be created for the
: convenience of practical measurements of positions and velocities,
: provided such local measurements could ultimately be transformed to
: the fixed CoM reference frame.
:
: (c) Can many IRF in relative motion be under acceleration in BCRF?
: As per the Relativity Principle all non-rotating reference frames that
: move with uniform velocity with respect to one another, are defined as
: Inertial Reference Frames. Let us consider three space ships
: S1,S2,S3, moving within our solar system with relative uniform
: velocity with respect to one another. Further let us associate
: reference frames K1, K2, K3 with these space ships so that these
: reference frames also move with relative uniform velocity with respect
: to one another. Therefore, in accordance with relativity principle,
: these reference frames K1, K2, K3 will be defined as inertial
: reference frames. But apart from relative uniform velocity between
: S1S2, S2S3, S1S3, all three space ships S1,S2,S3, could also be
: moving under common gravitational acceleration in BCRF towards the
: barycenter of the solar system. Hence we find that inertial reference
: frames defined as per relativity principle could actually be moving
: under accelerated motion in a CoM or fixed reference frame. As such
: the very notion of inertial reference frames under uniform relative
: motion is ambiguous, vague, impractical and misleading. Apparently
: this notion was introduced just for conducting hypothetical thought
: experiments.
:
: (d) Why do we need to locate fictitious observers on each IRF?
: Actually the notion of fictitious observers is as ambiguous and
: misleading as the notion of IRF. Modern advancements in technology
: have replaced the fictitious observers with advanced electronic
: instrumentation while the real observers watch the computer displays
: to observe the process. For example the position and velocity
: measurements of a spacecraft are first recorded in the local reference
: frame of instrumentation and then transformed to the CoM fixed frame
: of the solar system, the BCRF.
:
: (e) Can relative measurements alone yield correct information?
: No, the relative measurements alone cannot yield true information
: regarding position and velocity measurements of particles in the
: relevant region of space under consideration. To illustrate this
: point let us consider two space ships S1 and S2 moving in the solar
: system. Let their position vectors in BCRF be R1 and R2 and their
: velocity vectors be V1 and V2 respectively. The dynamic motion of
: these space ships will obviously be governed by the parameters R1, R2
: and V1, V2 . Now the relative separation between S1 and S2 will be
: given by R_12 = R2 - R1 and the relative velocity between them will
: be given by V_12 = V2 - V1. If we use only relative coordinates
: and measure only the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 (without
: using BCRF) we find that the dynamic motion of the two space ships is
: not governed by the relative parameters R_12 and V_12 . Hence it is
: quite obvious that the relative measurements alone do not provide the
: complete information as required.
:
: 5. Relative Measurements
: ---------------------------
: 5.1 Let us now elaborate some relevant aspects of the relative
: measurements with or without the use of Inertial Reference Frames.
: The term 'relative measurement' of object B with respect to a
: reference frame K1 implies the measurement of position and velocity of
: B relative to the origin A1 of reference frame K1. There are two
: special cases of these relative measurements depending on the state of
: the origin A1 of reference frame K1.
:
: (i) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
: frame K1 are known with respect to the relevant CoM reference frame,
: then the relative measurements in K1 can be regarded as local
: measurements, with K1 known as a local reference frame. Such local
: measurements constitute a necessary step in establishing the absolute
: measurements in the relevant CoM fixed reference frame like the
: BCRF. For example, the relative measurement of position and velocity
: of Pioneer type spacecraft from the deep space network (DSN) stations
: constitute such a local measurement.
:
: (ii) When the position and velocity of the origin A1 of reference
: frame K1 are not known with respect to the relevant CoM reference
: frame, then all measurements in K1 can be regarded as purely
: relative measurements, with K1 known as a relative reference frame.
: If the origins A1 and A2 of two such relative reference frames K1
: and K2 are known to be moving with a uniform relative velocity with
: respect to each other, then these relative reference frames will be
: known as Inertial Reference Frames of Special Relativity fame. As per
: the relativity principle, all IRF constitute a group and no particular
: member of this group can be considered a preferred reference frame.
: However, since a CoM fixed reference frame like BCRF can be considered
: a preferred reference frame for the relevant region of space, it
: cannot be regarded as a member of the IRF group. Hence it can be
: easily seen that a group of IRF can neither be practically defined or
: established in physical space nor be used for real practical
: measurements. Such a group of inertial reference frames is only a
: hypothetical construct used for erecting an equally hypothetical
: castle of Special Theory of Relativity (SR).
:
: 5.2 Finally we may conclude that a CoM reference frame may be
: considered as an absolute or fixed or the preferred reference frame
: for the given N particles contained within a closed volume of space.
: The measurements in a convenient local reference frame constitute a
: necessary step for establishing the absolute measurements in a
: relevant CoM fixed reference frame. Relative measurements alone,
: without reference to a CoM fixed reference frame can give misleading
: results. For example, relative measurement of position and velocity
: of a uniformly moving spacecraft, from the DSN stations may indicate
: as if the spacecraft is periodically accelerating towards or away from
: the DSN stations, which is highly misleading. Purely relative
: reference frames, popularly known as inertial reference frames in SR
: parlance, are only useful for conducting hypothetical thought
: experiments and hence constitute a practically redundant notion.
:
: To summarize, I have shown that a CoM reference frame for a certain
: closed volume of space (with certain matter content), is a unique or
: special reference frame (K0) , like BCRF for our solar system. The
: assertion that this CoM reference frame is indeed unique, special,
: preferred and 'absolute' for the closed volume of space under
: consideration (like our solar system) is based on the following facts.
:
: (a) Total kinetic energy (hence total mass-energy content) is a
: minima in this CoM reference frame, in comparison with any other
: reference frame (which is not at rest in this CoM reference frame)
: including all so called Inertial Reference Frames (IRF) in relative
: uniform motion w.r.t. one another. This confirms that the SR notion
: of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.
:
: (b) Total linear momentum of all particles enclosed within this
: closed volume of space is zero in the CoM reference frame which is non-
: zero in all other IRF. This again confirms that the SR notion of the
: equivalence all IRF is fallacious.
:
: (c) Within the closed volume of space under consideration, the CoM
: reference frame is in fact the only true inertial reference frame
: which can be practically established (like BCRF) and in which Newton's
: laws of motion strictly hold. For example for tracking and modeling
: the trajectory of a spacecraft, all measurements *must* be referred to
: the BCRF, which is a CoM reference frame for the solar system. This
: again confirms that the SR notion of the equivalence all IRF is
: fallacious.
:
: (d) As explained at para 4(e) above, unless we make use of CoM
: reference frame, the position and velocity measurements (of any object
: located within the closed volume of space under consideration) made in
: any of the so called IRF are incomplete and *cannot* be used directly
: in dynamical equations of motion. This again confirms that the SR
: notion of the equivalence all IRF is fallacious.
:
: Once we find that the measurements made in IRF (without reference to
: CoM reference frame) are incomplete and the notion of equivalence of
: all IRF is fallacious, it obviously follows that the notion of
: Lorentz transformation for measurements in different IRF is equally
: fallacious. Further, the speed of light c can be assumed to be
: constant within the CoM reference frame. There is absolutely no need
: to first *assume* the existence of hypothetical 'inertial reference
: frames' in relative uniform motion w.r.t. one another and then to
: *assume* the constancy of speed of light in all such hypothetical
: frames.
:
: How do you know all this?
:



Jesus said.





--











www.EverestPoker.org.uk

On Jan 9, 7:58*am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:
How do you know all this?

Don't quote the whole post, arsehole.

"Autymn D. C." wrote in message
...
On Jan 9, 7:58 am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:
How do you know all this?

Don't quote the whole post, arsehole.

Like a few paragraphs of text are going to jam up
the internet?


--
Martin Hogbin

On Jan 9, 10:58*am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:

"GSS" wrote in message

...

How do you know all this?

I was on the point of askind you "how could you have plowed through
all that dense text", but I see, on getting to the nub of your reply,
this may not have been precisely necessary.

On Jan 13, 2:09*am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:
"Autymn D. C." wrote in ...
On Jan 9, 7:58 am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:

How do you know all this?

Don't quote the whole post, arsehole.

Like a few paragraphs of text are going to jam up
the internet?

few = 3-5
26 are not a few, goat****. They jam up readers of usenet, such as
me, who have to scroll past the older posts, or even click on another
page to see the whole post, to read your reply.

Autymn D. C. wrote:
On Jan 13, 2:09 am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:
"Autymn D. C." wrote in ...
On Jan 9, 7:58 am, "Martin Hogbin"
wrote:

How do you know all this?
Don't quote the whole post, arsehole.

Like a few paragraphs of text are going to jam up
the internet?

few = 3-5
26 are not a few, goat****. They jam up readers of usenet, such as
me, who have to scroll past the older posts, or even click on another
page to see the whole post, to read your reply.

Sounds like someone needs a computer that was produced later than 1995
with a monitor capable of greater than 320x200 resolution. =D Scrollbars
are your friends.