Why in the world would Einstein suggest....

@layman,

Can I ask a question too, or is it only you who can?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

You claimed:

Quote:

The concept (of a frame of reference as defined in SR) entails nothing whatsoever regarding the motion ... as it's basically a mathematical concept.

So I asked you a simple question regarding how a physicist would employ MATHEMATICAL calculations from a chosen frame of reference, to wit:

Quote:

The frame of reference, for purposes of this question: A point exactly 50 yards due north of the center of the statue of liberty in NYC at midnight on Dec. 21, 2014.
OK?

Now then:

1. You are a physicist, who wants to employ SR to make calculations concerning the rate of clocks on the moon.
2. You choose the above-described frame of reference as the one you will use to make your calculations from.
3. What do you, as a physicist, assume about the motion (or lack thereof) of your chosen frame of reference when employing the Lorentz transformations to arrive at your mathematical conclusions?

Have an answer? Is your answer "Nothing, nothing at all"?

1 Reply

@layman,

Why do you assume that you and only you can ask question? Was your Mama constantly ignoring you or something?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Was your Mama constantly ignoring you or something?

OK, let me respond to ALL your recent questions. The answer I have to this one applies to all of them. Here it is:

Look, Bitch, it takes at least 2 bitches for a bitch fight to occur. I aint one. If you're looking for a bitch fight, try elsewhere.

If you have any thing substantial to say on the topic of this thread, and/or the claims you make in it about the topic. Then say it. That is, answer the question, unless you're just all hat and no cattle.

1 Reply

@layman,

If you don't want to be treated like a bitch, don't act like one.

I have plenty of substance to share, Laygirl. I am just curious about why you'd think you can ask questions and expect answers, while others cannot ask you any question... Odd that.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Here's a question for you, Bitch.

Answer it, or shut the **** up.

Are you ever going to quit sucking 20 donkey dicks a day? Yes or no?

That's your type of question, so answer.

1 Reply

If only A2K's resident cop giujohn were here to put an end to this heartbreaking altercation! Crying or Very sad

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I have plenty of substance to share,

Sure you do. All of it misinformed and ignorant. You're the guy who says all motion is relative. You're the guy who knows nothing about Galileo, but thinks that even mentioning his name somehow answers all questions. You're the guy who thinks the mutual attractions of the solar system (and therefore the barycenter) can't be calculated. You're the guy who can't keep from confounding absolute motion with relative motion. You're the guy who claims to know the implications of a frame of reference, but can't answer a simple question about it.

You're the guy who says observers are irrelevant, but when I go to the trouble to quote Einstein himself, verbatim, from his 1920 treatise on SR (where he talks about observers and their assumptions, and how they are relevant in SR), you refuse to even read it. You're a functional illiterate when it comes to SR, but think you know it all. Typical blowhard.

1 Reply

@layman,

I have work to do. I am not retired like all you fuckers. I don't have all the time it would take to educate you, and I don't owe you anything. So you learn some respect, or you and your questions can go **** yourselves. Understood?

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

Are you ever going to quit sucking 20 donkey dicks a day? Yes or no?

Why don't you tell him how you managed to quit?

1 Reply

@wmwcjr,

Nice tune, wm.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Now there is the arrogance we have all come to associate with the French Government .

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Dear Ms dizzythetush,
Your best contribution to a debate about science yet ! Keep trying hard !
Sincerely,
Ionus

0 Replies

@Ionus,

You mean, there are many xenophobic cunts like you?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Feel better now ?

Orifice5fingers owes me an apology.

0 Replies

I think that this thread should have a naughty step.

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

Quote:
Motion, by definition, must be relative to something. Image an empty universe, and you appear in it by teleportation or something. How can you tell if you going somewhere or staying static?

You would certainly know if you were accelating, because you would "feel"it.

How could you be accelerating? The only way would be to burn some fuel, eject some gas, or throw away some equipment. Your movement would then be relative to the ejected gas, confirming the point that all motion is relative.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

...confirming the point that all motion is relative.

What, aside from being wrong, is the "point," exactly? As Newton and Einstein noted, even if the universe only contained one rotating spherical object, you would know it is moving (because it would be bulging at it's equator).

But suppose you didn't "know" and weren't able to "tell?" So what? How could that possibly mean something is NOT moving? Just because you can't, using unaided vision, see small objects beyond a certain distance does not mean they don't exist.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

As Newton and Einstein noted, even if the universe only contained one rotating spherical object, you would know it is moving (because it would be bulging at it's equator).

Still, one should be able to account for this universe assuming no spin to the object at all, simply by adding the centrifuge and Coriolis forces to gravity.

Quote:

But suppose you didn't "know" and weren't able to "tell?" So what? How could that possibly mean something is NOT moving? Just because you can't, using unaided vision, see small objects beyond a certain distance does not mean they don't exist.

Not a correct comparison. In the case of an empty universe + one object, there is no way to tell for sure if the object is moving, and it means nothing anyway, the way i see it. All motion is relative.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Still, one should be able to account for this universe assuming no spin to the object at all, simply by adding the centrifuge and Coriolis forces to gravity

Hnnnm, that would be quite a trick, seeing as how such forces are an artifact of (caused by) rotational motion. That, of course, is why they are called "pseudo-forces" or "fictitious forces." They are not true forces, just "apparent" forces caused by accelerated motion.

Quote:

All motion is relative.

Heh, Ollie you repeat this mantra as if it were the ONLY thing in the Holy Bible of God, and in the face of all contrary evidence. I dare-say that not a single physicist agrees with your holy grail, though. So much the worse for physicists is the response I would expect from you.

But you never answered the question, to wit: What is the "point?"

Just curious--where did happen to stumble upon this notion, and why do you cling to it with such unshakable devotion? You obviously did not learn it in the courses you say you took in special relativity, because SR denies this.

1 Reply

Why in the world would Einstein suggest....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know