Raider Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 *If this is in the wrong place, my apologies. I'm throwing out ideas, but they are relevant to actual physics. --------------- I was thinking, what if there is no universal rest frame? Working off of relativity, the upper limits of x,y,z velocity would be the velocity of the slowest thing in the universe + c. If it were accelerated, then the upper limits of velocity would increase. The slowest thing in the universe would be the referance frame for momenta, and thus an increase in slowest thing would transfer momentum throughout everything in the universe. This seems to lead to an acceleration of velocity towards infinity, which as best I can tell is not the case. So I propose there is a universal rest frame for the laws of physics to work upon. I'm sure you can find plenty of holes to tear into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 I am not entirely sure of your train of though, but I will see what I can say. In essence, I believe you are wrong Whatever velocity you are travelling (relative to something else) light always travels at c, regardless. if you look at light coming from the sun, you will see it travelling at c. If I fly towards the sun at 0.9999999c , I will see the light coming towards me at c, so the upper limit on velocity is always c. Hence the upper limit on velocity is always c. essentially, the only thing you can use as a momentum reference, is yourself (although you could arguably project your reference point onto another object if you were doing some mathematical calculations) and the object you are measuring. nothing else matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 It may be that there is a universal reference frame, but we don't have the science/technology to prove/detect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 24, 2003 Share Posted April 24, 2003 of course. according to current science and understanding there is no universal rest frame, but then current science suggests exactly the fact that there is no universal rest frame. were there to be one, I think there would have to be a massive rewriting of relativity. incidentally, what would the rest frame which has the Cosmic Microwave Background equal (barring fluctuations) in all directions - in that there is no red shift on one side and corresponding blue shift on the other - be a rest frame relative to? It would seem to be that would be a rest frame relative to everything at the time of decoupling of radiation and matter, or am I getting to grandiose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preston Taist Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 The gradure the better my friend! i see what your saying and i like it, but your right, for realativity to work than there can be no universal reference frame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Can things be relative to the absence of a rest frame, or is that just too messed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preston Taist Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 I like that 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ Can things be relative to the absence of a rest frame, or is that just too messed up? It's not too messed up, it just doesn't mean anything. Originally posted by Radical Edward so the upper limit on velocity is always c. Hence the upper limit on velocity is always c. Nice flowing text there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri Nice flowing text there. nice pedantry I am at work when I post those so I rarely get time to proof read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri It's not too messed up, it just doesn't mean anything. My mistake. Can things be relative to the quantum absence of a rest frame, or is that just too messed up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ My mistake. Can things be relative to the quantum absence of a rest frame, or is that just too messed up? It's not messed up, it just doesn't mean anything. Seriously, what ARE you getting at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 I'm amazed you didn't get that second one, especially since it was blatantly DS9'ed to pieces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted May 9, 2003 Share Posted May 9, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ I'm amazed you didn't get that second one, especially since it was blatantly DS9'ed to pieces. I tried to ignore DS9. I really did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Mattson Posted May 10, 2003 Share Posted May 10, 2003 Originally posted by Raider I was thinking, what if there is no universal rest frame? Working off of relativity, the upper limits of x,y,z velocity would be the velocity of the slowest thing in the universe + c. No. Your assumption of "no universal rest frame" is an assumption of relativity (buried in the relativity postulate), and the conclusion you state does not follow from that. Specifically, if we assume relativity the upper limit on velocity is c, period. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tim O'Connor Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 ...Your assumption of "no universal rest frame" is an assumption of relativity (buried in the relativity postulate)... Tom A lot can be measured and calculated without any reference to the universal reference frame. So Relativity theory need not assume anything about a universal reference frame. However, Relativity Theory can also work within the universal reference frame . . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now