Is it true?

Is it true?

a
a

January 2nd, 2018, 4:51 pm #1

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
Reply
Share

roger
roger

January 2nd, 2018, 5:24 pm #2

>> is it true?

yes, different people interpret the equations in different ways.

The issue is:

should the equations be interpreted in the way that Lorentz says they should be interpreted or should they be interpreted in the way that Einstein says they should be interpreted?

And the answers proposed by people are many: some say by Einstein, some say by Lorentz, some say Einstein changed his mind and finally thought should interpret it Lorentz's way (the issue being Einstein 1905 denied ether then in 1920 seems to have accepted ether, and Lorentz was wanting things always to be interpreted from ether) and many other interpretations.

Reply
Share

a
a

January 2nd, 2018, 5:43 pm #3

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
Both Einstein and Lorentz say that space is shrinking, but this is not the case in the formulas.
Reply
Share

roger
roger

January 2nd, 2018, 10:18 pm #4

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
what you probably mean is from special relativity context-

Length contraction is the phenomenon that a moving object's length is measured to be shorter than its proper length, which is the length as measured in the object's own rest frame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Length_contraction

so the length of a moving object supposedly shrinks/contracts; its not the space that the object moves in that is shrinking; that is special relativity context. Then with general relativity its gets confusing with spacewarps et al, where space itself supposedly can shrink and expand in that.

Reply
Share

a
a

January 2nd, 2018, 10:35 pm #5

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
It is the special relativity indeed, but it's almost the same in GR. According to Einstein, body is space, and they both shrink together, due to speed. However the formulas show that body-space expands. This is a silly contradiction between words and formulas.
Reply
Share

roger
roger

January 3rd, 2018, 1:00 am #6

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
not quite, Pentcho has pointed out the absurdity that relativists claim. A train longer than a certain gap can shrink as it moves and fall down that gap, while the gap does not shrink:


from:http://www.network54.com/Forum/304711/t ... Relativity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg
"Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity"

It is not difficult to realize that trapping unlimitedly long objects inside unlimitedly short containers implies unlimited compressibility and drastically violates the law of conservation of energy. The unlimitedly compressed object, in trying to restore its original volume ("spring back to its natural shape"), would produce an enormous amount of work the energy for which comes from nowhere.

At 9:01 in the above video Sarah sees the train falling through the hole, and in order to save Einstein's relativity, the authors of the video inform the gullible world that Adam as well sees the train falling through the hole. However Adam can only see this if the train undergoes an absurd bending first, as shown at 9:53 in the video and in this picture:

[linked image]

Clearly we have reductio ad absurdum: An absurd bending is required - it does occur in Adam's reference frame but doesn't in Sarah's. Conclusion: The underlying premise, Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, is false.

Pentcho Valev



Reply
Share

roger
roger

January 3rd, 2018, 1:04 am #7

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
add on: if you are saying relativists don't understand relativity and what they claim of relativity is really different to what relativity gives; then I agree "they" don't understand relativity.
Reply
Share

a
a

January 4th, 2018, 12:34 am #8

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
Pentcho is not relevant. Einstein said that moving body shrinks longitudinally, but the Lorentz formula saying that moving body expands longitudinally.

Reply
Share

roger
roger

January 4th, 2018, 1:44 am #9

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
>>Einstein said that moving body shrinks longitudinally, but the Lorentz formula saying that moving body expands longitudinally.

the usual problem with that is: given two observers A and B with A observing B moving on the moving body (i.e. on train or whatever), who is claiming that the moving body shrinks- is it A or B
Reply
Share

jz
jz

January 4th, 2018, 11:02 am #10

The Lorentz transformations are misunderstood.

http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journa ... nload/7162
The Lorentz transformations of special relativity may also be written with Δx and Δt and Δx' and Δt'.
(and γ =1/√(1-v^2/c^2))

If the observer is in the unprimed system and the observed rod in the primed system (with length Δx’),
Δt must be set to zero (for the observation: t1=t2) and Δx must be solved (expressed in terms of Δx').
Result: Δx=Δx'/γ.

If the observer is in the primed system and the observed rod in the unprimed system (with length Δx),
Δt’ must be set to zero (for the observation: t1’=t2’) and Δx’ must be solved (expressed in terms of Δx).
Result: Δx’=Δx/γ.

Both see length contraction in the other frame.

Time observation is as follows:
If the observer is in the unprimed system and the observed clock in the primed system, Δx’ must be set
to zero (the clock does not move in its own frame) and Δt must be solved (expressed in terms of Δt').
Result: Δt= γ Δt'.

If the observer is in the primed system and the observed clock in the unprimed system, Δx must be set
to zero (the clock does not move in its own frame) and Δt’ must be solved (expressed in terms of Δt).
Result: Δt’= γ Δt.

Both see time dilation in the other frame.
Reply
Share