Jump to content

eiapeteides

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://hellenicflame.blogspot.com

Retained

  • Lepton

eiapeteides's Achievements

Lepton

Lepton (1/13)

10

Reputation

  1. Thanks for the links! But none of them provides any experimental evidence of length contraction. There were some proposals for experimental verification though. So far i do not see any evidence!
  2. Do you have a link to any resources about the experimental confimation of length contraction? I don't dispute your statement but I came up empty when I googled it up.
  3. So if I understand you correctly you are saying that all observers measure c=300.000.000 m/s but the "meter-stick" gets shorter depending on the observers velocity? How is c constant if all observers measure velocity in m/s but use different meter sticks? And has this contraction of "meter-sticks" been ever observed? I've got a masters degree in aerospace and worked 7 years for esa. I' am not an expert but quite familiar with the mathematics of special relativity. But I honestly can't see how it makes sense.
  4. Einstein does not define the units for distance (m) and time (s) independently of the speed of light c. Special relativity defines a time interval as distance divided by c and distance as time interval multiplied by c: c = 300.000.000 m/s s = 300.000.000 m/c m = cs/300.000.000 If, in the equations above, we substitute s or m with their respective definitions we obtain: c = 300.000.000m/300.000.000m/c <=> c=c The statement c=c is surely always true independently of the actual value of c. This is a classical example of a circular argument. If the units of measurement are defined by nothing more then the postulate of the universal constancy of c then it shouldn’t come as a surprise that measurements utilizing those units can’t but confirm the universal constancy of c. It appears as if in special relativity units of measurement have no physical meaning. They seem to be pure mathematical scaling factors which are set for each reference frame in such a way, that the universal constancy of c is maintained. Is relativity still a theory of nature or is it just a theory of mathematics? Is there a difference between mathematical and physical? The complete argument can be found on my blog http://hellenicflame.blogspot.com
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.