Relativistic Law Of Reflection

[ralfcis]

Sluggo, I posted on the physics stack exchange whether only material structure contracts in length contraction or does space itself flatten.

[Amplituhedron]

 

In the twin paradox does the returning twin also come back permanently length contracted flatter than the twin on Earth?

 

   

In fact, of course, the answer from Dale in this link, labeled 123 (or 124? it seems the numbers change, for some reason) in the upper left of the answer by whatever numbering convention they are using there, is exactly right — and corresponds precisely with what I told here months ago.

 

There is neither “permanent” length contraction nor “permanent” time dilation. In the case of the twin paradox, the traveler’s clock is NOT dilated, when it rejoins the stay-at-home twin — it does not even make sense to say that a clock is “dilated.” Rather, as Dale notes, the clock, which shows less time having elapsed for the traveling twin than for the stay-at-home twin,  is a record of BOTH time dilation AND length contraction.

 

As Dale notes, you could also achieve the permanent record of length contraction alone if the traveling twin had an odometer on board his ship. It would show that he had traveled a shorter distance than that measured by the stay-at-home twin in the earth frame.

 

Which is the whole point of SR: Each twin sees his own clock ticking normally, but only in his/her own frame, and they are both right! The stay-at-home twin will tell the traveling twin that less time elapsed on his traveling clock because his clock ticked slower that that of the earthbound twin. But if the traveling twin has an odometer on board, he can point to it and show that he in fact traveled a shorter distance than the earth twin measured, and that is why his clock recorded less time elapsed — it was ticking perfectly OK, but the shorter distance you travel, the less time will elapse, obviously!

Edited October 10, 2019 by Amplituhedron

[ralfcis]

Yes the addition of the odometer does make relativity sensible, except how do you construct this odometer? It doesn't really measure distance. It's actually the clock you have on board isn't it. You've just pasted a sign on the clock saying "This is not a clock, this is an odometer manufactured by Amp industries." A real odometer would be milestones along the journey and the tally of those would not show any length contraction.

 

However, your last post has clarified why we have been fighting all these years. I didn't appreciate how dependent relativity was on length contraction. It can't exist without it. I don't need it because I use Yv instead. That concept would be hard to understand for anyone so committed to the existence of length contraction. You invent a non-time based odometer and then I'm convinced Einy was right all along.

Edited October 10, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

I put your answer up on the physics stack exchange. I like it.

[ralfcis]

Also it looks like Sluggo's interpretation is wrong. Space itself contracts because the odometer would measure how much the space travelled has contracted.

[Amplituhedron]

I don’t understand your objection. I wish I had thought of the odometer myself. I thank Dale for the example.

 

The clock on board the traveling ship measures time, and the odometer measures distance. Surely the difference between the two is obvious? Yet as measuring devices, though different, they are inextricably intertwined, because time and space, though different, are also inextricably intertwined.

 

You keep saying — if this is still your position — that you can have relativity with time dilation only, and no length contraction. But the addition of the odometer to the twin’s experiment shows why this must be wrong.

 

If the twin returned to the earth and his clock lagged that of the earth observer, but if his odometer showed the same length to and from the traveler’s destination as calculated by the earth observer, then quite obviously, the traveler would have exceeded the speed of light.

If SR is true, then c is invariant and both time dilation and length contraction must occur. If either time dilation or length contraction is not true, then c is not invariant and SR is entirely wrong.

[ralfcis]

"but if his odometer showed the same length to and from the traveler’s destination as calculated by the earth observer, then quite obviously, the traveler would have exceeded the speed of light."

 

This is my objection, just because his Yv >c does not mean his v >c. c= x/t or x'/t'. That is c's invariance and max velocity from any perspective. I use Yc or Yv = x/t'. No odometer required, I'm assuming space is invariant. I'm also not violating the formula for c. The ship travelling 4ly to proxima Centauri according to his starcharts from the earth perspective at .8c will do that trip in Yv= 5/3 * 4/5 = 4/3c but that is x/t' not x/t. He's using his own clock readings to measure his Yv. He has not violated c because from his perspective c travels at Yc = 5/3 c. Light will still beat him to his destination. Using Yv and distance travelled in his own time has no need for an odometer because space need not be warped.

Edited October 10, 2019 by ralfcis

[ralfcis]

I've had to recently change my stance of time dilation being an illusion for 2 reasons:

 

1. If time dilation was just velocity's effect on clock info, then the muon experiment would not have any real muons hit earth.

 

2. If time dilation was just info then age difference in the twin paradox would just be Alice showing up with a clock no longer sync'd but she herself would not have aged less than Bob. In the clock handoff twin paradox, Charlie does indeed show up with his clock younger but he himself does not age slower than Bob. I don't know why that is but if Charlie flew with Don in a side ship and Don did not sync his clock to Alice's, his clock would not have aged slower wrt Earth but his and Charlie's clocks would not read the same even if they had sync'd their clocks to a far off earth station before Charlie took Alice's clock handoff. I'll have to do the math.

[sluggo]

Amp;

This is the simplest 'twin' scenario, with B outbound and inbound at .6c.

There is no need for calculation, telescopes, doppler effects, odometers, secret handshakes, etc. Both A and B have identical clocks. A will receive 8 signals from B and B will receive 10 signals from A. The number of signals is conserved within a closed path. Both will agree on the counts.

[sluggo]

In the reference frame U, A moves outbound a distance of .4, while B moves outbound a distance of .6, reverses and returns to A. A and B each move at a constant speed.

U concludes, If B's motion of .8 was simultaneous with A's motion of .4, then B's speed was faster than that of A. From studying the light clock, U knows the clock cycle slows as the clock moves faster, relative to a reference clock. U concludes the B clock reading is less than the A clock reading.

The difficulty arises when the viewer attempts to interpret the spacetime graphic as if it was a geographical map. The shorter time interval seems contradictory when assigned to the longer path. the spacetime graphic plots x=vt horizontally, and y=ct vertically.

A line is a history of positions, an x-location corresponding to a sequence of clock events. The ratio is then vt/ct=v/c, or speed. In the example, speed of A is .4/1 and speed of B is .8/1. Light speed is a line at 45 deg.

For a geographical map, x=vt is the common expression for calculations. When solving for time, t=x/v, This inverse relation is often overlooked, and in pre-relativity physics, with a constant x, the greater speed yields the smaller time.

[Amplituhedron]

 

Amp;

This is the simplest 'twin' scenario, with B outbound and inbound at .6c.

There is no need for calculation, telescopes, doppler effects, odometers, secret handshakes, etc. Both A and B have identical clocks. A will receive 8 signals from B and B will receive 10 signals from A. The number of signals is conserved within a closed path. Both will agree on the counts.

hypo-amp-1.gif

 

Yes, I completely agree.

 

I was just addressing Ralf's specific question about "permanent" time dilation vs. supposedly impermanent  length contraction, pointing out, as did Dale, that a clock is a record of time dilation and length contraction both, and that you could have a similar record stressing mainly length contraction if the ship had an odometer.

[ralfcis]

Amy and Bob promised to send each other a letter a week for each week they were apart. But when they got together, Amy had only received 8 letters from Bob when she had sent 10 to him. She didn't care to hear his sorry explanation and she broke off the engagement.

 

You don't even need Sluggo's lines or graphs or even any analysis, just look at the numbers at the point  when Amy and Bob re-unite. 8 to 10, the end. No need to understand how that works, it just does. Look I don't need to imply you two are any more moronic than those guys on the Physics stack exchange, they are equally as unknowledgeable and uninterested in finding the answers; they're just interested in blowing their own horns. I'm just interested in finding out if either of you have looked into how and where those two missing letters went.

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Amy and Bob promised to send each other a letter a week for each week they were apart. But when they got together, Amy had only received 8 letters from Bob when she had sent 10 to him. She didn't care to hear his sorry explanation and she broke off the engagement.

 

You don't even need Sluggo's lines or graphs or even any analysis, just look at the numbers at the point when Amy and Bob re-unite. 8 to 10, the end. No need to understand how that works, it just does. Look I don't need to imply you two are any more moronic than those guys on the Physics stack exchange, they are equally as unknowledgeable and uninterested in finding the answers; they're just interested in blowing their own horns. I'm just interested in finding out if either of you have looked into how and where those two missing letters went.

Imagine matter jets spewn from two seperate black holes cross paths closer to one black hole than the other. Imagine our universe as the interior of an event horizon within a metaverse, and that within the eyes of the two aforementioned black holes exist hyperbolic mini-cosmic webs, each galactic filament representing a string in that metaverse. When these state particle, aka "quantum dot", entangling retrograde matter jets cross closer to one bh than the other in that microcosm of tachyon fluid there will be a gamma to >radio phase shift upon the creation of primordial daughter universe black holes with a pair of cross products equivalent to state change, however the neutralization of particle pair production equivalent to dark energy where perfect vacuums may exist occurs first within the black hole nearest to where the matter jets became perpendicular.

 

 

In that way, you get a clear visual of time dilation being limited somewhat by range or we see range as a factor in the distribution of time dilation.

Edited October 12, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[ralfcis]

Why are you doing this, Poly? Please stop.

[OverUnityDeviceUAP]

Why are you doing this, Poly? Please stop.

When you've already developed a geodesic (i.e. Planck and gravitational constants), a geometry (i.e. flat space or curved space) and a working set of 4D matrices, it doesn't matter how you visualize the topology there are numerical values behind sentences seemingly void of arithmetic. I am now a cipher, a celestial engineer. Edited October 12, 2019 by OverUnityDeviceUAP

[Amplituhedron]

Amy and Bob promised to send each other a letter a week for each week they were apart. But when they got together, Amy had only received 8 letters from Bob when she had sent 10 to him. She didn't care to hear his sorry explanation and she broke off the engagement.

 

You don't even need Sluggo's lines or graphs or even any analysis, just look at the numbers at the point  when Amy and Bob re-unite. 8 to 10, the end. No need to understand how that works, it just does. Look I don't need to imply you two are any more moronic than those guys on the Physics stack exchange, they are equally as unknowledgeable and uninterested in finding the answers; they're just interested in blowing their own horns. I'm just interested in finding out if either of you have looked into how and where those two missing letters went.

 

But — good god! — this has been explained to you, many times, by many people, including me! Burt Jordaan explained it to you years ago to you — here is his explanation! Evidently you just don’t understand the explanation, alas.

[ralfcis]

Oh good boy Amp, you responded like you were trained to do. And there you go adding some more lines to Sluggo's lines. I don't want to bore you with a long rebuttal but here is the real answer to how time goes missing:

 

What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

 

Take a look at part 3, the Rindler metric.

 

What you produced is just one of many misrepresentations of how age difference works and its not even the most popular among people who don't understand relativity. Do you want me to go through Jorrie's incorrect explanation line by line?

 

PS I don't dispute the Rindler metric explanation, which is kept out of popular science journalism, I just have  a simpler explanation.

 

PPS. I know neither you nor Sluggo will respond to this. You feel humiliated, I understand. You'll both just ignore this since admitting ignorance would be a blow to your manhood. So you'll slither away again for a while and return with your pride intact as if the Rindler metric never happened.

Edited October 13, 2019 by ralfcis