Constancy of light speed without relative time.

[DimaMazin]

A forward part of travelling object is reduced. A back part of travelling object is extended. Therefore we see light speed always the constant.

b=[v+(c-v)*sin(a/2)]/(c-v*cos a )*g

b- factor of length contraction

v- speed of object

c- light speed

a - angle between direction of motion and direction of measurement

g - gamma factor

This formula is made according to laws of measurement of speeds.

[DimaMazin]

A forward part of travelling object is reduced. A back part of travelling object is extended. Therefore we see light speed always the constant.

b=c/[(c-v*cos a)*g]

b- factor of length contraction

v- speed of object

c- light speed

a - angle between direction of motion and direction of measurement

g - gamma factor

This formula is made according to laws of measurement of speeds.

Let's consider any speed v=c(g²-1)^1/2/g

For example g=3 than v=282647040 m/s

If a=0 than b=5.828427

Concerning us the traveler overcomes 282647040m/s,his light 299792458m/s.We see their relative speed=17145418 m/s.The traveler sees 17145418 m as 99930819m per our second.He has slowed time in 3 times, therefore sees light speed 299792458 m/s.

[DimaMazin]

Let's consider any speed v=c(g²-1)^1/2/g

For example g=3 than v=282647040 m/s

If a=0 than b=5.828427

Concerning us the traveler overcomes 282647040m/s,his light 299792458m/s.We see their relative speed=17145418 m/s.The traveler sees 17145418 m as 99930819m per our second.He has slowed time in 3 times, therefore sees light speed 299792458 m/s.

Use of the factor for definition of change of light frequency .

f_0=f_s*b

Edited July 31, 2012 by DimaMazin

[DimaMazin]

Why do physicists think that Doppler length contraction is wrong?

[Ronald Hyde]

Einstein showed that only two premises were required to deduce all the consequences of Relativity. What is the point of introducing unneeded added premises?

Edited August 14, 2012 by Ronald Hyde

[DimaMazin]

Einstein showed that only two premises were required to deduce all the consequences of Relativity. What is the point of introducing unneeded added premises?

Let's consider.You and I are the fast travelers concerning each other.I see you are traveling to me.Your braking does not show your ageing to me. However it shows my fast ageing to you.So?

Just created meson is motionless relatively of The Earth. Fast electron is traveling to meson. Distance between them of 30 kilometers. If the very fast(0.9999999c) electron will not do braking then why it will not see own collision with the meson?

Edited August 14, 2012 by DimaMazin

[ACG52]

This is probably a translation problem, but none of the above made any sense to me.

[Ronald Hyde]

Let's consider.You and I are the fast travelers concerning each other.I see you are traveling to me.Your braking does not show your ageing to me. However it shows my fast ageing to you.So?

Just created meson is motionless relatively of The Earth. Fast electron is traveling to meson. Distance between them of 30 kilometers. If the very fast(0.9999999c) electron will not do braking then why it will not see own collision with the meson?

 

Special Relativity really concerns itself with the depiction of events which occur in space and time, and it's true that objects which are moving relative to an observer appear distorted, but to an observer which is not moving relative to the object, there is no distortion. This is well known and accounted for in the equations. So there really isn't any problem with the idea that different observers may see something as having a different length at different speeds or directions. It's just that we can derive all of these facts from Einsteins two premises, we don't need to add any extra ones to get things right.

[DimaMazin]

Special Relativity really concerns itself with the depiction of events which occur in space and time, and it's true that objects which are moving relative to an observer appear distorted, but to an observer which is not moving relative to the object, there is no distortion. This is well known and accounted for in the equations. So there really isn't any problem with the idea that different observers may see something as having a different length at different speeds or directions. It's just that we can derive all of these facts from Einsteins two premises, we don't need to add any extra ones to get things right.

If you don't want to know who specifically has which time,then Doppler length contraction factor can successfully work in two premises.

[DimaMazin]

Don't forget that Eistein's length contraction factor contradicts laws of measurement of speeds.

[Delta1212]

Don't forget that Eistein's length contraction factor contradicts laws of measurement of speeds.

How?

[DimaMazin]

Let's consider any speed v=c(g²-1)^1/2/g

For example g=3 than v=282647040 m/s

If a=0 than b=5.828427

Concerning us the traveler overcomes 282647040m/s,his light 299792458m/s.We see their relative speed=17145418 m/s.The traveler sees 17145418 m as 99930819m per our second.He has slowed time in 3 times, therefore sees light speed 299792458 m/s.

Einstein's traveler sees 17145418 m as 51436254 m per our second.He has slowed time in 3 times,therefore should see light speed 154308762 m/s