• Re: On the irrelevance of clock synchronisation to special relativity

    From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to JanPB on Tue Feb 13 12:43:32 2024
    On 2/13/24 5:37 AM, JanPB wrote:
    [...]

    Note also that for deriving the equations of SR, Einstein's second
    postulate can be replaced with any appropriate experimental observation,
    such as:
    a) pion beams exist that are longer than ~20 meters (both
    CERN and Fermilab have had pion beams more than a kilometer
    long).
    b) No matter how much energy is pumped into a charged particle in
    an accelerator, its speed relative to the lab never exceeds c
    while its kinetic energy increases correspondingly.
    c) The observed trajectories of high-energy charged particles in
    magnetic and electric fields, as a function of their kinetic
    energy.

    Or his second postulate can be replaced with a more abstract,
    theoretical statement: there is a finite upper bound on the speed of information transfer.

    (In discussing this last, one should note that it is
    inspired by (b). It should also be pointed out that
    arbitrarily-large speeds can destroy energy/momentum
    conservation, and common notions of causality, because
    objects could "zoom in from infinity".)

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MaciejWozniak@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Tue Feb 13 18:57:46 2024
    Tom Roberts wrote:

    On 2/13/24 5:37 AM, JanPB wrote:
    [...]

    Note also that for deriving the equations of SR, Einstein's second
    postulate can be replaced with any appropriate experimental observation,

    And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by idiots like
    you "improper" clocks of GPS or TAI keep measuring y'=t,
    just like all serious clocks always did.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MaciejWozniak@21:1/5 to ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog on Tue Feb 13 18:55:42 2024
    ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:

    JanPB wrote:

    We perform the experiments described below far away from any external forces >> (including gravity) so objects when left alone travel uniformly in straight >> lines.

    Thanks. I had never thought of SR being based purely on
    the results of experimental measurement.

    And it's not, of course. Poincare was right, you're
    an idiot and The Shit is just ma bizarre, violating
    common sense convention of speaking.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MaciejWozniak@21:1/5 to JanPB on Tue Feb 13 18:53:15 2024
    JanPB wrote:

    In a previous thread ("Einstein's Relativity contains a HUGE Loophole. Its Implications Can't Be Ignored") a common assumption is made that clock synchronisation is essential to setting up and defining special relativity.

    Then an argument is presented critiquing the relevant clock synchronisation (typically, Einstein's) as in some ways deficient or arbitrary or impossible to
    verify experimentally. This then "leads" to the conclusion that special relativity is circular at best and self-contradictory at worst.

    But this is an incorrect

    And poor idiot Jan is a queen of England too.

    , although widespread, assumption. Special relativity
    is a theory which is based on a geometry (whether this is a sensible thing to do is another topic) and therefore it does not need coordinate axes, or clock sync, for its definition. It's the same with Euclidean geometry: it existed just fine before Rene Descartes.



    Sure, but your idiot guru had to announce it false,
    as it didn't want to fit his madness.

    So I'll describe below the relevant experimental setup that necessarily implies
    special relativity holds (to the experiment's error bars) WITHOUT EVER referring to, or relying on, synchronising clocks. It only assumes a bunch of rulers (identical in construction) and a bunch of clocks (identical in construction).

    Sorry, trash, anyone can check GPS, clocks of
    identical construction have no mystical power you're
    suggesting and are useless in serious measurements.
    Too bad for The Shit, too bad for idiots like you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gharnagel@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Wed Feb 14 21:57:00 2024
    Tom Roberts wrote:

    Note also that for deriving the equations of SR, Einstein's second
    postulate can be replaced with any appropriate experimental observation,
    such as:
    a) pion beams exist that are longer than ~20 meters (both
    CERN and Fermilab have had pion beams more than a kilometer
    long).
    b) No matter how much energy is pumped into a charged particle in
    an accelerator, its speed relative to the lab never exceeds c
    while its kinetic energy increases correspondingly.
    c) The observed trajectories of high-energy charged particles in
    magnetic and electric fields, as a function of their kinetic
    energy.


    Or his second postulate can be replaced with a more abstract,
    theoretical statement: there is a finite upper bound on the speed of information transfer.

    For bradyons. For luxons it's also a lower bound (in vacuum).

    (In discussing this last, one should note that it is
    inspired by (b).

    Which are bradyons.

    It should also be pointed out that
    arbitrarily-large speeds can destroy energy/momentum
    conservation, and common notions of causality, because
    objects could "zoom in from infinity".)

    Tom Roberts

    I don't think so, Tom. Bilaniuk et al. in "Meta relativity"
    showed that FTL particles would obey E = |m|c^2/sqrt(u^2/c^2 - 1),
    which approaches zero as u approaches infinity. Of course
    they could still come in from space-like distances. Even the
    LT allows that: u' = (u - v)/(1 - uv/c^2), where u < c^2/v.

    The problem, of course, is the denominator which is because of

    dt' = gamma(dt - v*dx/c^2), which has the same proscribed domain.

    The argument that the domain for v1 > v rules out the extended
    domain for v is false, however.

    Gary

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)