On the impossibility of observing or measuring unaccelerated motion in free space.

[geistkiesel]

Two ships Va and Vb are approaching each other at some relatiove velocity Vrel. The ships will pass each oither 100 meters apart. Hoiw can one determine if she is moving or at rest and or what part of Vrel does each frame own?

 

As the ships are about to pass each directs a momentum stone poerpendiclar to her particlular frame aiming at a flat area on the other ship. Thje momentum stone and the flat areas are essentially golf balls and golf ball materials (flats).

 

Case 1. Va is at rest Vb has all the motion.

 

As The Va stone strikes the flat area on Vb the surface if Vb will impart a momentum impulse to the stone in the general direction of Vb. The Vb stone directed at Va, hving only Vb momentum will strike the Va flat and be impoelled in the same direction and anbgle as the Va stone.

 

Case 2 Vb at rest Va has all the motion.

 

Use the same logic on this case.

 

Case 3. Va = Vb.

 

The stones of each ship have the same absolute velocity with opposite directions and therefore the stones will reflect back up the original trajectory of the emitted stone,

 

Case 4, the velocity is split unequally between Va and Vb.

 

The stone with the highest absolute velocity will move in that direction the angle being a measure of the relative amounts.

[ydoaPs]

Two ships Va and Vb are approaching each other at some relatiove velocity Vrel. The ships will pass each oither 100 meters apart. Hoiw can one determine if she is moving or at rest and or what part of Vrel does each frame own?

 

there IS NO "at rest". how does newtons laws of physics work with relativity in that aspect. i guess it should be "an object at rest relative to its surroundings will stay at rest relative to its surroundings until an outside force acts upon it."

[[Tycho?]]

Velocity is relative. One is at rest, the other moves. The other is at rest, one moves. They both move. All equally valid. Its relative. And there is not "at rest", except for relative to something else.

[geistkiesel]

'']Velocity is relative. One is at rest, the other moves. The other is at rest, one moves. They both move. All equally valid. Its relative. And there is not "at rest", except for relative to something else.

Yes of course, but special relativity tells us that detecting or measuring unacceleratd motion in free space is impossible. Tycho? tell me if I err, but the system I briefly described allows the systems to detect motion absolutely without any assumptions where any of the frames adjusts their motion, theoretically.

 

Using a beam of photons as a coordinate of an inertial frame, adjustments to zero velocity is pratical and certainly possible.

[Thales]

But zero velocity relative to what. Space itself is not static.