4

# Is there a relativist in the crowd

Sun 2 Feb, 2014 12:32 pm
At another thread I attempt to explain my skewed view of relativity, a mere speculation, in the hope you might be able to help me clarify it for the benefit of at least a couple of other participants--or you know somebody who could

http://able2know.org/topic/232832-1

Background:

For sheer simplicity I posit three observers, Albert who's situated on the East Coast and two very sturdy travelers Isaac and Marty who pilot impossible rocket ships capable of instantly accelerating to c (almost). I've halted Mars at a distance of 5 light minutes or about 60 million miles, all clocks having been synchronized some time ago

At the moment in q, noon Al's time, Marty is just arriving from his home planet while Isaac is just taking off; to illustrate a t = v/c of plus or minutes 5 minutes at that distant planet; all very well-established classical Einsteinian time-at-a-distance, nothing new about it, physicists everywhere in concert, no disagreement anywhere

The confusion evidently arises from my suggestion that a slightly different view which for want of a better term I call "relative relativity," a speculation incidentally understood by participants with whom I've discussed it at other Internet discussion forums (tho not necessarily endorsed)

My view simply emphasizes Isaac's notion that it's 5 minutes later, to better satisfy needs of the intuition explaining the changes Al perceives taking place with the two travelers; as detailed in the link above

So amongst our some 100,000 a2k'ers isn't there a relativist of two who might help me clarify my position to Ros, Con, and perhaps a few others who might be drawn in herewith

Thanks guys
• Topic Stats
• Top Replies
Type: Question • Score: 4 • Views: 7,125 • Replies: 125

rosborne979

2
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 12:55 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
The confusion evidently arises from my suggestion that a slightly different view which for want of a better term I call "relative relativity,".

No. The confusion arises from the following paragraph not making any sense...
dalehileman wrote:
At the moment in q, noon Al's time, Marty is just arriving from his home planet while Isaac is just taking off; to illustrate a t = v/c of plus or minutes 5 minutes at that distant planet; all very well-established classical Einsteinian time-at-a-distance, nothing new about it, physicists everywhere in concert, no disagreement anywhere

What "home planet"? And Isaac is taking off from where? And clocks were all synchronized where?... and when?

And beyond all that, what different view are you talking about? It seems like all you're doing is describing conditions (vaguely). You're not even asking a question, or specifying what is different from what.
dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 01:11 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
What "home planet"?
Mars where Marty resides

Quote:
And Isaac is taking off from where?
Earth where Al resides

Quote:
And clocks were all synchronized where?
Al's with Marty's back home

Quote:
... and when?
At some unspecified time previous. I think if you will review past postings all this will become clear Ros but again thank you for your curiosity

Quote:
And beyond all that, what different view are you talking about?
My view, as I had said, perhaps several times, emphasizing Isaac's view that it's five minutes later on that distant planet: Noon here but 12:05 there

Help, somebody
Brandon9000

0
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 02:47 pm
First of all, t = v/c is wrong if t is supposed to represent time. v and c are both speeds and so their quotient is dimensionless and not a time.

So Al is watching Marty return and Isaac leave. What exactly is the 5 minutes?
dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 03:12 pm
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
First of all, t = v/c is wrong...
Yea thanks Bran, s/b d/c. You gotta forgive the 83-year-old

http://able2know.org/post/edit/p-5568839

Quote:
So Al is watching Marty return and Isaac leave.
Yes tho we don't know how long Marty had resided on that distant planet. Regardless of early experience however he's now just visiting Al

Quote:
What exactly is the 5 minutes?
It's presumably 5 light minutes to Mars at 60 million miles
0 Replies

Brandon9000

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 03:19 pm
So, Marty travels 60 million miles and arrives as Isaac leaves. Al is watching. The distance is 5 light minutes. Isaac thinks it's five minutes later than what?
rosborne979

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:20 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:

Rosborne979 wrote:
And clocks were all synchronized where?
Al's with Marty's back home

How did Al and Marty synchronize their clocks when they were separated by 5 light-minutes?

Any communication they would have had with each other would have been delayed by 5 minutes as well. Did they compensate for that by subtracting 5 minutes from someone's clock, or did they simply leave the 5 minute synchronization "error" in place?
rosborne979

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:21 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
I think if you will review past postings all this will become clear Ros ...

Quit saying that. I've reviewed them already. They are definitely NOT clear.
dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:24 pm
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
Isaac thinks it's five minutes later than what?
Noon Al's time (that's by the clocks Marty left behind)
0 Replies

dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:28 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
How did Al and Marty synchronize their clocks when they were separated by 5 light-minutes?

Quote:
….or did they simply leave the 5 minute synchronization "error" in place?
Both, aware of Einstein's work, agreed that (at a much earlier time) when Marty got Al's message, he set his clocks 5 minutes later
dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:29 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
They are definitely NOT clear
Ros my most sincere apologies
0 Replies

contrex

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:44 pm
When you say that it's 5 minutes later on Mars, is that like me saying it's one hour later in Berlin, or 8 hours earlier in Denver, Colorado?

rosborne979

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 04:46 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
Both, aware of Einstein's work, agreed that (at a much earlier time) when Marty got Al's message, he set his clocks 5 minutes later

1. Ok, so all clocks start off at zero.

2. One clock is on Mars (5 light minutes from Earth) and the other two are on Earth.

3. Two clocks (one on Earth and the other on Mars) switch position at approximately the speed of light.

4. After everything arrives at its destination, the two clocks on Earth read 5 minutes and 0 minutes (approximately). The clock on Mars reads 0 minutes, but only the person on Mars can see it.

5. If the person on Mars reports his reading (of zero) then it takes 5 minutes for the message to reach Earth and by then the two clocks on Earth read 10 minutes and 5 minutes.

Do you agree or disagree with that? I'm still trying to figure out what your argument is.
dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 05:08 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
When you say that it's 5 minutes later on Mars, is that like me saying it's one hour later in Berlin, or 8 hours earlier in Denver, Colorado?
No
0 Replies

dalehileman

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 07:14 pm
@rosborne979,
Quote:
1. Ok, so all clocks start off at zero.
Yea Ros, so to speak

Quote:
2. One clock is on Mars (5 light minutes from Earth) and the other two are on Earth.
Al's is certainly on Earth; at least one on Mars left behind by Marty, and we can presume that he and Isaac each carries one in his ship for a total of 4 clocks

Quote:
3. Two clocks (one on Earth and the other on Mars) switch position at approximately the speed of light.
Not quite sure Ros what you mean by that

Quote:
Quote:
4. After everything arrives at its destination,...
Not sure what you mean by that either. But let's assume it means the moment Isaac reaches Mars

….the two clocks on Earth read 5 minutes and 0 minutes (approximately).
By classical relativity Al's reads 12:05 while we don't know about Marty's because we never decided whether he had stopped to visit with Al. At noon when he arrived at Earth 5 minutes ago it had read 11:55

Quote:
The clock on Mars reads 0 minutes,

Quote:
but only the person on Mars can see it.
Two if you include Isaac at his arrival. Marty had of course departed 5 minutes ago but there's Marty's mate Marsha

Quote:
5. If the person on Mars reports his [her] reading (of zero)
12:05

Quote:
then it takes 5 minutes for the message to reach Earth
Yes by classical relativity, I presume Ros you mean Marsha's message announcing his arrival

Quote:
...and by then the two clocks on Earth read 10 minutes and 5 minutes.
Al's reads 12:10 but of course Isaac's long gone and probably Marty too

Quote:
Do you agree or disagree with that?
Agree only partly and based on certain assumptions above. I assume what you mean by 10 min having elapsed that upon receiving Marsha's message Al's reads 12:10 of course

Quote:
I'm still trying to figure out what your argument is.
With this posting we haven't yet discussed my "argument", which I thought I had already described by earlier postings, in some detail, at least twice

In my "argument" destinations don't much matter and so we've spent a lot of unnecessary time describing Isaac's trip and his encounter with Martha. At noon Al's time classical time-at-a-distance places the reading of Marty's clocks back home at 11:55 (as reported by Marty zipping past) while Isaac reports, "I judge it to be reading 12:05" (in spite his own, naturally, still reading noon)

Thus at Noon Al's time it's 12:00 plus or minus five minutes on Mars. We don't know if it's noon there of course since we can't determine the planet's attitude toward the Sun

Now, my crazy view places special emphasis on Isaac's observation because it seems to make so much more sense of Al's slightly later report describing the changes seemingly having taken place in Isaac and his ship at his takeoff

For instance: When Isaac almost instantaneously (to him) arrives at Mars, his own clock of course still reading 12:00--by classic theory everyone agrees upon (except maybe me)--it's because it had been stopped throughout the trip

I merely propose instead Issac be allowed to judge his trip seemed so quick because his speed was so great, not infinite of course, but many, many times c (the two ships being really remarkable devices, certainly)

At risk of repetition still again, another way to express it: At any point in the Universe the time at distance d is d/c later

.....so velocity measured by conventional means is underestimated

Again, once more, repeating, my posit doesn't refute Einstein's relativity but only provides a skewed way of looking at it in order to satisfy intuitive requirements puzzled by all those peculiar changes. Hence relative relativity

Of course I could be dead wrong through some technicality of which I'm yet unaware. Still, it so easily explains Time Dilation, Length Contraction, and Mass Accretion that it ought to be entertained with the notion of gaining possible new insights

There's just a whole lot gone by the board, to be sure. For instance, Isaac reports the distance to Mars instead of 60 million miles to instead 13 ft, 6-1/2 in., with Marty's home planet flat as a pancake. But detail of this sort only introduces extraneous complication

Ros thanks once more for the opportunity to shoot off my old mouth
Brandon9000

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 07:55 pm
I find your description confusing, so I'll do one of my own.

Isaac is on Earth with a clock that shows the local time, which is 12:00. Isaac leaves Earth and travels to Mars at 99.9% the speed of light. Marty is on Mars with a clock that shows the local time which is also 12:00 (Substitute any time you like. It doesn't matter.). He leaves for Earth and travels at 99.9% the speed of light. When Isaac reaches Mars, his clock still reads 12:00, but he finds the local time to be 12:05. When Marty reaches Earth, his clock still reads 12:00, but he finds the local time to be 12:05.
rosborne979

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 07:58 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
By classical relativity Al's reads 12:05 while we don't know about Marty's because we never decided whether he had stopped to visit with Al. At noon when he arrived at Earth 5 minutes ago it had read 11:55

Please stop introducing more people and more clocks, it's only making the scenario more difficult.

Beyond that, the above paragraph is wrong. Assuming that 12:00 (what I call 0) is the synchronized point at which all clocks start, then no clock will ever read 11:55.

Here it is again with your 4 clocks:

1. There are 4 clocks, all synchronized to 12:00. Two of them are on Mars and two of them are on Earth.

2. At a certain instant, one of the Earth clocks goes to Mars and one of the Mars clocks goes to Earth (they switch position) at approximately the speed of light. For both of those clocks, time essentially stops, so they will read 12:00 when they arrive.

3. The clocks that stayed in place each show 12:05 and the clocks that travelled each show 12:00 (approximately).

The fact that Marsha is there or whether someone stopped to visit anyone else doesn't matter.

Now, do you agree with that? We have to reach some common ground on which we agree, or we can't move on to figuring out your next conjecture, so we've got to agree on something.
rosborne979

1
Sun 2 Feb, 2014 08:08 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
Again, once more, repeating, my posit doesn't refute Einstein's relativity but only provides a skewed way of looking at it in order to satisfy intuitive requirements puzzled by all those peculiar changes.

There ARE no peculiar changes. You are proposing a skewed way of satisfying intuitive puzzles when the puzzles don't exist. This is why I'm trying to clarify your examples so that we can make sure you have an accurate understanding of how relativity works before taking the next step. At the moment you appear confused about the actual effects of relativity.
dalehileman

1
Mon 3 Feb, 2014 11:41 am
@rosborne979,
Quote:
There ARE no peculiar changes
The apparent changes to a moving object though necessary mathematically puzzle the intuition

Quote:
At the moment you appear confused about the actual effects of relativity.
Perhaps so Ros but in what way specifically
dalehileman

1
Mon 3 Feb, 2014 11:55 am
@Brandon9000,
Except, Bran, in my version when Isaac arrives at Mars, Marty had already left 5 minutes ago. Reason: His arrival at Earth noon makes it possible to better illustrate the concept of time-at-a-distance

### Related Topics

Relativistic mechanics - Discussion by Granpa
Tesla's take on relativity - Discussion by gungasnake
Cesium clocks??? - Question by gungasnake
Why c, revisited still again - Question by dalehileman
relativity - Question by alexjlaonnae
Does light have Mass? - Question by peter jeffrey cobb
simple relativity question - Question by ralphiep

1. Forums
2. » Is there a relativist in the crowd