|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Purple dosn't beleve in relativity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3940 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
The problem is the practice you put the example into. 658 < 10 is not true.
This is used more often in set theory than with numbers. If set X is a subset of set Y and set Y is a subset of set X then X = Y It also might be more appropriate to use <= so that (A <= B) and (B <= A) implies (A = B) The trouble is you often cannot tell the equality part and it seems like most of the discussion so far is weather or not the distances are really equal given that there are different frames of reference. The real meat of what I was trying to get at is, if the first distance has as its upper bound the second and the second has as its upper bound the first then they should be equal. Similar to the proof of equivalence used in mathematics but not exactly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PurpleYouko Member Posts: 714 From: Columbia Missouri Joined: |
You have no intention of doing the experiment , why not? I think it is because you know science is accurate enough to predict reality and you just do not want to admit you are wrong. Do the experiment or what else is there to discuss? I await your results. Well of course I know what will happen so what is the point of it. It would break my damn foot unless I had a good pair of steel toe-cap shoes on. I don't see what the heck this has got to do with relativity though. There is no paradox either implied or real about dropping a bowling ball. Any theory that gives approximate result to whatever degree is quite obviously going to get it right the vast majority of the time. It is just those times when it doesn't get it right that concern me. I honestly can't even imagine a situation where the bowling ball won't squash my toes. This just isn't one of those situations is it? The point I am trying to get at is that just maybe there are other explanations for life, the universe and everything, besides relativity.During the last few days alone I have found half a dozen different postulations that all claim to be the right one. I personally have a problem with Relativity. I'm not really sure why. It just never seemed to sit right with me. I was hoping this forum would help me to get a better grasp on the subject and in some cases I now understand the argument for relativity a lot better. Some of the things I thought I knew have been squished like bugs. I admit that I don't know enough of this field to argue my points in a way that even I can beleive.In other ways though it seems like the real solution is hidden behind "fudge factors" and stuff that has been piled up to reinforce itself. I know that science works this way. It has to be allowed to be modified and tested. Einstein himself reworked the theory many times. However I am seeing many of the same arguments used by religions to defend their beleifs. That is to say a complete closed mind set when it comes to questioning the great God Einstein. It is as if science is in a rut and can't get out. These are my thoughts as the oficial "devil's advocate" anyway. PY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
That is to say a complete closed mind set when it comes to questioning the great God Einstein. There's absolutely no close-mindedness at all, here. What it is, is that there's a vast, vast, vast weight of evidence that Einstien was right. Any objection to relativity is going to have to address that mountain of evidence before it can be taken seriously. As fun as it is to talk about, the off-the-cuff thoughts of non-scientists on the internet simply isn't equal to that task. It's like a kid trying to poke holes in a brick wall with a drinking straw. It's not close-mindedness to tell him it's simply not going to happen.
It is as if science is in a rut and can't get out. Yeah, a rut of explaining weird observations and making very accurate predictions. Why on Earth would we want to leave that rut?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1532 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined: |
Purple Youko writes:
Ever heard of quantum tunneling? I honestly can't even imagine a situation where the bowling ball won't squash my toes.That is in a nut shell my whole point. The concept of quantum tunneling runs counter intuitive to everything humans have ever observed. But irregardless the strangeness of the universe and the laws that govern the way reality plays out wages on. Humans are magnificent creatures, but we are limited by what we can know. Reality is not limited by our inability to perceive it. Even it something seems upsurd and makes no since like "fast clocks move slow" etc.... Still does not mean science has it wrong. Models are just that, not set in stone but adjusted and verified and built upon. Einstien had the genius of thinking outside the box so to speak,, and now you , someone who advocates "thinkin outside the box" questions his elegant theory. Nothing wrong with questions, but if the answers are there then it is up to you to assimulate the information and reconcile what you choose to believe. Simply throwing up your hands and saying it does not make sense is not going to cut it. Take care. "One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22503 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
PurpleYouko writes: I personally have a problem with Relativity. Since you don't even understand it, how can you have a problem with it?
Any theory that gives approximate result to whatever degree is quite obviously going to get it right the vast majority of the time. It is just those times when it doesn't get it right that concern me. You need an example of something relativity doesn't get right. As someone has already mentioned, relativity and quantum theory aren't compatible. In any unified theory, one or both of them has got to give. If you looking for problems with relativity, I suggest you start there.
These are my thoughts as the oficial "devil's advocate" anyway. One can only effectively play devil's advocate about things one already understands. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Okay, so are we together on these things...
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4706 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
fWhat the heck is reality then? Depending on how you define "reality" we may never know. We may be incapable of knowing. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Dread Dormammu Inactive Member |
You are exactly RIGHT when you say that two observers, moving relative to eachother, will think they observe the others time dialation.
(I'm sure that many science writers have published other versions of what follows but I wanted to write my own.) I like to use little story examples to help me undertand tricky concepts like relativity. Here's one I made up that expalins the phenominon you discussed: Zorg and Viola are two robots in their own identical, super advanced, spaceships. They each pull their own spaceship up next to the others so they can chat. Suddenly, one of the spaceships accelarates away from the other. Because of the intense magnetic feild that their engines produce while accelarating, both robots are temporaraly rendered unconcious. When the robots come to, they see their frends ship drifting away at a constant velocity. They want to know which ship malfucntioned and accelarated (They have no eternal points of reference like stars etc). Viola looks out her window and sees Zorgs ship moving away. Because he is moving away, relative to her, his ship undergoes redshift, when she hails him on her radio his voice sounds slow, low and drawn out as the signal is distorted by the very same doppler effect. In fact every test Viola can think to preform seems to suggest that time ITSELF is moving slower for Zorg. Viola knows about realtivity and time dialation so she thinks "Aha! It must have been Zorg that accelarated." She resones that she doesn't need to fix her ship. HOWEVER the situation is IDENTICAL from Zorgs point of veiw. He sees violas redshift, hears her voice coming slowly out of the radio, sees that the giant grandfater clock on the outside of viola's ship is moving slower than his etc etc. And comes to the SAME conclution! Silly robots! They should know better if they want to be flying around through space. So without a point of reference BOTH observers see the other as moving more slowly through time. So, how can you confirm witch one is "realy" moving? YOU CAN'T (without another external frame of reference). That's part of what is so weird! Even if Zorg says "alright I'm going to put an end to this foolishness" and blasts towards viola at top speed. His apparent "youngness" when he arrives will be explained by the dialation he underwent accelarating towards Viola.
I personally have a problem with Relativity. I'm not really sure why. It just never seemed to sit right with me. I'll tell you what your problem is! It's that it (relativity) is so completly counter intuitive! We NEVER observe this phenomina in our daily lives, (though it still happens). When my roomate and I drive a cassorole over to our frends house, our frend doesn't remark on how much warmer our cassorole is than the identical one she made at exsactly the same time! When I play a game of tennis (not that I ever actualy play tennis) I don't notice how much "younger" the ball I played with is than the ones I left in the can. BUT THE BALL AND THE CASSOROLE ARE YOUNGER, we just can't observe that fact unless we work with particle accelarators. We almost ALWAYS have external fraims of reference that are, from our perspective, unchanging so it's perfectly natural for us to rail against the idea of a universe where all frames of reference are eaquly valid. But that doesn't mean that our initial perceptions are right. Your "Personal" problem with relativity isn't personal at all, all humans share it! Why? Becase we have evolved in an enviornment where things move at miniscule fractions of the speed of light. This message has been edited by The Dread Dormammu, 12-08-2004 04:55 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PurpleYouko Member Posts: 714 From: Columbia Missouri Joined: |
Jazzn
Ahh! Thanks for the further explanation. Now it makes a lot more sense to me. You may well be right. PY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PurpleYouko Member Posts: 714 From: Columbia Missouri Joined: |
Percy writes: One can only effectively play devil's advocate about things one already understands. Well therin lies at least a part of the problem. I thought I did understand it, at least well enough to argue some points and propose some flaws.I was obviously mistaken in that assumption. As someone has already mentioned, relativity and quantum theory aren't compatible. In any unified theory, one or both of them has got to give. If you looking for problems with relativity, I suggest you start there. I would love to if I knew the first thing about QM but truth be known, I have never studied the stuff. I have heard it said that QM and Relativity disagree in some extreme cases but that is as far as it goes. It was actualy Mr Jack that said that. Maybe he can shed some light on the subject. I think at this point, I will attempt to sum up what I have come up with over the last couple of days of rather intense reading and of course, input from this forum.
I have taken this as far as I am able to now. My knowlegde of the subject is not deep or complete enough to argue any more points (other than useles hair splitting about definitions). Dormamu: I tried to meet your challenge and I have obviously failed. At least I learned a few more things in the attempt so it wasn't time wasted and it was kind of fun too. One more point is that I don't understand why some of the replys have become personal. This does nothing to further your cause and in fact only tends to alienate the other debater (is that a real word?) and drive a deeper schism between the opposing sides of the debate. I also don't appreciate the accusation of not being a scientist. I am not a "Physicist". I admit that. But a Scientist is one who searches for knowledge is it not? I do that every day, at home and at work. Thanks for the explanations guys. It's been fun. See you all on other threads. (or here if you really want to carry on of course) PY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22503 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Great post!
The only thing I can comment on is about scientists not wanting to upset the Einstein applecart. Nothing could be further from the truth, and in fact, scientists continue to attempt to verify predictions of Einsteinian relativity. One of those predictions is that a spinning mass will drag space with it, and there's a satellite being launched soon that will study this effect. This research project was recently scooped when a pair of scientists announced that analysis of satellite orbital positions over the past 20 years gave results consistent to within 1% of the predictions of relativity. They say they're currently working to improve the accuracy, because if the 1% error bars turn out to be an actual difference it would be a huge nonconformity that would mean that Einsteinian relativity would have to be modified, and it would be a sure Nobel. You don't win Nobels by blindly adhering to existing theory - you have to make an original contribution. The race has been on to prove Einstein wrong ever since his 1905 paper on special relativity and his 1916 paper on general relativity. So far Einstein has been winning, but that doesn't mean he'll win forever. I agree you received harsh treatment - I had a negative reaction to the post that seemed to assume we needed an education about relativity, and maybe some others did, too. The relativity paradoxes *are* difficult to think about for many of us, myself included, but over time I've formed my own set of personal visualizations and analogies that have been very helpful. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PurpleYouko Member Posts: 714 From: Columbia Missouri Joined: |
Thanks Percy.
As for the Einstein applecart thing. I was referring to some kind of drastically out-of-the box kind of thing that wouldn't just require a modification to existing theory but a completely new theory based on totally different premises. Say for example, the ether (aether or whatever) that was widely accepted prior to Einstein, was actually found to exist and to explain everthing better than relativity does.It would be a really major upset wouldn't it? That was the kind of thing I was referring to. PY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
If the person you asked to come here is the one promoting some form of return to aether, he did register but has not posted. His site was interesting (if he would only turn off the annoying blincking paragraphs) but I think he will have an exciting time here. For example, he list 10 things that were impossible to believe. One of the ten was a variation on your original example. As you can see, many of us here have no problem believing such things and don't even see a paradox.
But you're doing just fine. I'm looking forward to learning from you in other threads. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4706 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
PY,
You've been talking about paradign shift. The science historians I've read seem to see it as a new generation replacement. The old guard may never quite grasp the new and the new is established as they are replaced by the upcoming generation. Science is a human activity. No divine absolute sanctions it. There are major shifts in understanding. It was hard to go from the theory of aether to relativity. And whatever the next paradign shift maybe there will be upheavals. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PurpleYouko Member Posts: 714 From: Columbia Missouri Joined: |
Thanks for the definition Ifen. Nicely put. That is exactly what I am talking about.
PY
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024