Relative Time Dilation Paradox

[xersan]

I am unaware of these results. I've never seen any disproof or experiment whose results go against SR. Please link, or give a reference.

-Will

 

Thanks. We can discuss the transprent proofs. Just I want to begin at follow :

 

1- The arithmetic total of velocities ın relativity:

 

If Ann is approaching Betty by 80 % of light's velocity < c >, and Carol is approaching Betty from the opposite direction by 60 % of < c > ; what is the value of Ann's approaching speed to Carol ? If Carol is reference.

 

2- Please read #17 under the <No time at the speed of light>

[Erasmus00]

1- The arithmetic total of velocities ın relativity:

 

If Ann is approaching Betty by 80 % of light's velocity < c >, and Carol is approaching Betty from the opposite direction by 60 % of < c > ; what is the value of Ann's approaching speed to Carol ? If Carol is reference.

 

By SR, the resulting velocity is .946c

 

2- Please read #17 under the <No time at the speed of light>

 

In that post, you assume that a source moving away from an observer undergoes time dilation, but a source moving towards an observer undergoes "time contraction" this isn't true. All moving sources undergo time dilation, if they are moving towards or away.

-Will

[Bobby]

By SR, the resulting velocity is .946c

 

 

 

In that post, you assume that a source moving away from an observer undergoes time dilation, but a source moving towards an observer undergoes "time contraction" this isn't true. All moving sources undergo time dilation, if they are moving towards or away.

-Will

 

 

Is there a difference between time dilation and time contraction? I understand what you mean, so it probably doesn't make any difference. Usually time is said to be dilated and length is said to be contracted. In any case, you are right, the direction of movement doesn't make any difference on velocity, the direction of movement's effect is on wavelength and frequency.

 

HOWEVER. How can you tell where something is except by looking at it? If the light from a spaceship is stretched over space (red shift) or squeezed into a smaller space (blue shift) is the physical spaceship not also stretched or squeezed?

[xersan]

1.1- In my opinion; Meeting time of Ann and Carol is a single moment. If Betty takes place at their meeting point, all of them meet at the same moment. This logical result requires the arithmetic adding of the speeds. If Carol is preferred as a reference, the relative speed of Ann according to Carol becomes 1.40 c foran observer out of the event. But Ann or Carol can observe image of the other by velocity of light. Here is true expression. The reason of logical trap is thinking as a person in the event.

1.2- Other logical determination for same subject: A star sends its lights to all directions at the meaning spherical. The radius of the light’s sphere expands by the velocity of light ( c ). And the diameter of the light’s sphere expands by the value of velocity < 2.c >. Does anybody claim that “ No, Also the diameter expands by < c > ?”

1.3- Meeting (or collision) simultaneously is dominant definition. The limit of relative velocity (for two independent objects) is < 2.c >. But, the observer in the event can not perceive this approaching speed. It means, the image of relative object comes always by the velocity of light to reference observer.

[xersan]

2- A source (As a star) can give its lights to all directions simultaneously. And an experiment can be set with the position A and B together simultaneously (You may suppose a source at the middle of a train or a space shuttle). Please try procedure the numerical examples with the Lorentz’s equations by yourself. The relations of the theory SR gives “time contraction” by the parameters of (-) v or (-) c.

[Bobby]

1.1- In my opinion; Meeting time of Ann and Carol is a single moment. If Betty takes place at their meeting point, all of them meet at the same moment.

 

 

 

OK, no problem so far.

 

 

This logical result requires the arithmetic adding of the speeds. If Carol is preferred as a reference, the relative speed of Ann according to Carol becomes 1.40 c foran observer out of the event. But Ann or Carol can observe image of the other by velocity of light. Here is true expression. The reason of logical trap is thinking as a person in the event.

 

 

Anything outside the event has no effect. Betty cannot say how Ann looks to Carol, Betty can only say how Ann looks to her (Betty) or Carol looks to her. If Ann is approaching Betty at 8/10 C and Carol is approaching Betty at 8/10 C, Ann can make assumptions that Ann is approaching Carol at 1 6/10, but she would be wrong. Also, since Betty is not part of the "How Carol looks to Ann" event, none of Betty's views matter.

 

 

1.2- Other logical determination for same subject: A star sends its lights to all directions at the meaning spherical. The radius of the light’s sphere expands by the velocity of light ( c ). And the diameter of the light’s sphere expands by the value of velocity < 2.c >. Does anybody claim that “ No, Also the diameter expands by < c > ?”

 

 

I think you're mixing your points of reference here. From the center of the sphere, light is moving outward at C in all directions. That does not mean that light from one side of the sphere is moving at twice C on the other side of the sphere.

 

 

 

The limit of relative velocity (for two independent objects) is < 2.c >. But, the observer in the event can not perceive this approaching speed. It means, the image of relative object comes always by the velocity of light to reference observer.

 

 

It appears to me that you assume the same rules apply to motion regardless of the motion's velocity. According to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, it simply doesn't work that way.

[xersan]

Yes, it does not mean that light from one side of the sphere is moving at twice c at the other side of sphere.

 

You has determined nuans that Einstein had could not seen.

 

The limit of relative speeds is <2.c> for two independent partners of relativity. He had has claimed that the value of this limit is also the velocity of light.

[Bobby]

Yes, it does not mean that light from one side of the sphere is moving at twice c at the other side of sphere.

 

You has determined nuans that Einstein had could not seen.

 

The limit of relative speeds is <2.c> for two independent partners of relativity. He had has claimed that the value of this limit is also the velocity of light.

 

 

It appears to me that this subject is all about what is "really" happening. It takes a certain amount of faith (a little math helps) to believe the things attributed to realtivity are true.

[xersan]

Of course, the limit of speed for only one material is < c >. But, we discuss and scrutiny the relative speeds and relativity requires minimum two actors. If these actors are independent, each of them has the limit of < c >. Also, the limit of approaching (or going away) speed is < 2.c >.

 

Two ends of the diameter of the light's sphere are the partners for a relativity experiment. We can put a material at the end of diameter. One of the ends goes away from the other by the velocity of maximum < 2.c >. But if an observer takes place at the end of diameter; he can see the other that it stays at the centre.

 

Natural events are never concerned how an observer watches.

[xersan]

It appears to me that this subject is all about what is "really" happening. It takes a certain amount of faith (a little math helps) to believe the things attributed to realtivity are true.

 

I know, chauvinistic thinkings are often at debates about SR. Because, mystical necessities may be effected upon brains.( I am sure that you are passed over this fiction.) But, scientific thinking requires to be neutral (or to be flexible). I want to use my mind insistently and scrutiny upon proposings.

 

Thanks for your high comprehension.

[Bobby]

Of course, the limit of speed for only one material is < c >. But, we discuss and scrutiny the relative speeds and relativity requires minimum two actors. If these actors are independent, each of them has the limit of < c >. Also, the limit of approaching (or going away) speed is < 2.c >.

 

Two ends of the diameter of the light's sphere are the partners for a relativity experiment. We can put a material at the end of diameter. One of the ends goes away from the other by the velocity of maximum < 2.c >. But if an observer takes place at the end of diameter; he can see the other that it stays at the centre.

 

Natural events are never concerned how an observer watches.

 

 

 

Sorry, but this simply isn't true.