Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Alien Being

A Problem With Gravity

92 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Hi there.

Firstly I should point out although I'm a qualified engineer my knowledge of physics doesnt extend to the full ins and outs of gravity. This thread is about gravity and a problem I hope will get cleared up for my thinking. Anybody is free to reply however please state why you are qualified to give me your answer as I want a scientifically correct one not what someone wants to be correct.

So the problem is with accelarating an object to light speed. Current physics tells us we cant do that as an objects mass increases the faster it goes and therefore requires more and more energy to accelarate the mass eventually requiring infinite energy to reach 100% of the speed of light. Another problem is how it was also form a blackhole.

So lets assume for simplicity I accerlate a football shaped object to 99% the speed of light traveling along a straight line path. Now my problem occurs if then we attempt to give it angular accelaration too. We could have our object travelling at 99% the speed of light in one direction while having it also rotate about its own centre at 99% the speed of light. Rotation can also happen along 2 axis so we could rotate it in both axis at 99% the speed of light.

This means my object is moving along 3 paths (1 linear, 2 rotating) each seperately at 99% the speed of light. What happens to its mass and time dialation?

Does it behave as if it was just traveling down the 1 path at 99% light speed or is the effect cumulative?

Edited by Alien Being

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there.

Firstly I should point out although I'm a qualified engineer my knowledge of physics doesnt extend to the full ins and outs of gravity. This thread is about gravity and a problem I hope will get cleared up for my thinking. Anybody is free to reply however please state why you are qualified to give me your answer as I want a scientifically correct one not what someone wants to be correct.

So the problem is with accelarating an object to light speed. Current physics tells us we cant do that as an objects mass increases the faster it goes and therefore requires more and more energy to accelarate the mass eventually requiring infinite energy to reach 100% of the speed of light. Another problem is how it was also form a blackhole.

So lets assume for simplicity I accerlate a football shaped object to 99% the speed of light traveling along a straight line path. Now my problem occurs if then we attempt to give it angular accelaration too. We could have our object travelling at 99% the speed of light in one direction while having it also rotate about its own centre at 99% the speed of light. Rotation can also happen along 2 axis so we could rotate it in both axis at 99% the speed of light.

This means my object is moving along 3 paths (1 linear, 2 rotating) each seperately at 99% the speed of light. What happens to its mass and time dialation?

Does it behave as if it was just traveling down the 1 path at 99% light speed or is the effect cumulative?

The answer is very simple: In how many directions does a photon travel simultaneously?

As far as I remember (and i had no physics going beyond 101) the rotating path can be disregarded unless the rotation speed comes near the speed of light (but I doubt there would be a mass not disintegrating before achieving it). And the straight and angular acceleration, combined, is what gives the speed at which the object is traveling. If you have 99% straight speed of light the angular acceleration cannot exceed .999999...99 of the total vectorized product of the objects speed... unless of course Einstein was wrong....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The answer is very simple: In how many directions does a photon travel simultaneously?

As far as I remember (and i had no physics going beyond 101) the rotating path can be disregarded unless the rotation speed comes near the speed of light (but I doubt there would be a mass not disintegrating before achieving it). And the straight and angular acceleration, combined, is what gives the speed at which the object is traveling. If you have 99% straight speed of light the angular acceleration cannot exceed .999999...99 of the total vectorized product of the objects speed... unless of course Einstein was wrong....

What are your qualifications?

Firstly angular accelaration has been shown to cause time dialation by Einstein himself. This means the simple rotation of earth warps space-time. If sending a projectile along a linear path also causes the warping of space-time then I see problems with gravity if that projectile is rotating at the same time.

Edited by Alien Being

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are your qualifications?

Firstly angular accelaration has been shown to cause time dialation by Einstein himself. This means the simple rotation of earth warps space-time. If sending a projectile along a linear path also causes it then I see problems with gravity if that projectile is rotating too.

Yes, but the total speed is still the product of the vectorized combination of angular and main speed trajectory (I believe in most countries you have that in junior high). See http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Vectors/TheVelocityVector.html

Now, as to the rotation, how much linear displacement does a pure rotation cause (not that such thing would exist in an isolated fashion in the non-theoretic world)? How much angular displacement? That is why I say it can be disregarded.

It comes down to the vectorized angular displacement components. And if you need energy X to cause a certain speed you do need the same energy to also create an equal angular speed. If you are using infinite energy to cause speed along a vector you cannot add an angular component because there is no more energy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I have written NASA several times and they will not answer my questions. Nasa's website says they have observed time dilation by sending two clocks on airplanes in opposite directions around the earth and measured time dilation, but they don't tell you the whole story.

Here is my question to Nasa which they refuse to answer.

If two spaceships orbit (Ship A and Ship B ) the Earth in opposite directions at the same speed and the same orbital distance, they are observed to experience the same dilation as viewed by an observer C on Earth because the ship's motion is identical as viewed by C, but in opposite directions.

The two orbiting ships should also experience dilation between each other because they are moving in opposite directions to one another according to Nasa and Einstein.

Each has a clock on board. So as Ship A observes Ship B, Ship A sees Ship B experience dilation. The Ship B observer has his window covered and only notices his clock, So that the time as observed from Ship A is, A time > B time, and A time < C time. Now the guy on earth sees both experience the same time because they are both moving in reference to him at the same identical speed but in opposite directions. So, as viewed from C, A time = B time, C time > A time, therefore, C time > B time.

Now all three meet up at Cape Kennedy and compare clocks. The ship A guy sees the B clock showing less time and when the C person looks at the same clocks, he sees A's and B's clocks showing equal time. This examples shows there are two realities possible because Ship A sees B's and C's clock running slow while C sees A's and B's running slow. Now, B sees A and C running faster. So, how can clocks be running faster and slower at the same time in the same reference frame (reality) unless different realities are possible.

So, who is right?

They all are right because there are two possible realities in this scenario (ship A's reality and C's reality). There are not three realities because B had his window covered and didn't observe.

Now, what happens if the guy in Ship B opens his window and looks back at ship A at the same time ship A is watching Ship B experience time dilation. Ship A and Ship B see the other experiencing dilation. So when they arrive on earth and meet up with C, A sees B's and C's clock run slower, B sees A's and C's clock run slower, and C sees both A's and B's clock run slower. This indicates 3 possible realities. The only difference is that B decided to observe. So, by adding a third observer, we have created a third reality.

Actually this indicates different realities are possible for every conscious being who observes other conscious beings from different points in space-time since no conscious being can occupy the same space at the same time as another conscious being.

So, what does this mean? This means our reality is an illusion.

You won't hear NASA or anyone else solve this paradox. They can't. And you won't hear them even discuss it either. They won't let the cat out of the bag. This will cause worldwide panic because people can't accept it because this implies that nothing we view as real actually exists outside of our own minds because reality changes with observation and observation is created in the mind.

I expect heat from this, but solve the paradox and show me where reality doesn't change. To do so would prove Einstein wrong.

Actually, I believe Einstein is only partially right. His equations are only correct under certain conditions and conscious observation is the key.

Comments?

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have written NASA several times and they will not answer my questions. Nasa's website says they have observed time dilation by sending two clocks on airplanes in opposite directions around the earth and measured time dilation, but they don't tell you the whole story.

Here is my question to Nasa which they refuse to answer.

If two spaceships orbit (Ship A and Ship B ) the Earth in opposite directions at the same speed and the same orbital distance, they are observed to experience the same dilation as viewed by an observer C on Earth because the ship's motion is identical as viewed by C, but in opposite directions.

The two orbiting ships should also experience dilation between each other because they are moving in opposite directions to one another according to Nasa and Einstein.

Each has a clock on board. So as Ship A observes Ship B, Ship A sees Ship B experience dilation. The Ship B observer has his window covered and only notices his clock, So that the time as observed from Ship A is, A time > B time, and A time < C time. Now the guy on earth sees both experience the same time because they are both moving in reference to him at the same identical speed but in opposite directions. So, as viewed from C, A time = B time, C time > A time, therefore, C time > B time.

Now all three meet up at Cape Kennedy and compare clocks. The ship A guy sees the B clock showing less time and when the C person looks at the same clocks, he sees A's and B's clocks showing equal time. This examples shows there are two realities possible because Ship A sees B's and C's clock running slow while C sees A's and B's running slow. Now, B sees A and C running faster. So, how can clocks be running faster and slower at the same time in the same reference frame (reality) unless different realities are possible.

So, who is right?

They all are right because there are two possible realities in this scenario (ship A's reality and C's reality). There are not three realities because B had his window covered and didn't observe.

Now, what happens if the guy in Ship B opens his window and looks back at ship A at the same time ship A is watching Ship B experience time dilation. Ship A and Ship B see the other experiencing dilation. So when they arrive on earth and meet up with C, A sees B's and C's clock run slower, B sees A's and C's clock run slower, and C sees both A's and B's clock run slower. This indicates 3 possible realities. The only difference is that B decided to observe. So, by adding a third observer, we have created a third reality.

Actually this indicates different realities are possible for every conscious being who observes other conscious beings from different points in space-time since no conscious being can occupy the same space at the same time as another conscious being.

So, what does this mean? This means our reality is an illusion.

You won't hear NASA or anyone else solve this paradox. They can't. And you won't hear them even discuss it either. They won't let the cat out of the bag. This will cause worldwide panic because people can't accept it because this implies that nothing we view as real actually exists outside of our own minds because reality changes with observation and observation is created in the mind.

I expect heat from this, but solve the paradox and show me where reality doesn't change. To do so would prove Einstein wrong.

Actually, I believe Einstein is only partially right. His equations are only correct under certain conditions and conscious observation is the key.

Comments?

i believe you'll find that both ships experience time dilation even if one ship isnt moving.

sorry no real qualifaction other than observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens to its mass and time dialation?Does it behave as if it was just traveling down the 1 path at 99% light speed or is the effect cumulative?

It is important to remember that the rules for special relativity apply to ``small point masses'' (like the rules for regular kinematics) if you want to extend those rules to a regular rigid body, you have to apply the rules separately to ``small parts'' of the body.

In short, the effect is cumulative - the centre of mass of your football will be going 99% c, while the outside parts may be going, say, between 99.9% and 89.1% c depending on the direction of rotation (these percentages are wrong, I didn't actually do the math, but you get the picture).

A person sitting on the football might think that the edges are rotating at 99% c, while a person outside the football will see them as rotating at 99.9% and the football moving at 99% c.

Note that as different parts of the football are traveling at different speeds, they have different masses and suffer different degrees of time dilation. The shape of the football will therefore be severely distorted when traveling in this manner.

You won't hear NASA or anyone else solve this paradox. They can't. And you won't hear them even discuss it either. They won't let the cat out of the bag. This will cause worldwide panic because people can't accept it because this implies that nothing we view as real actually exists outside of our own minds because reality changes with observation and observation is created in the mind.I expect heat from this, but solve the paradox and show me where reality doesn't change. To do so would prove Einstein wrong. Actually, I believe Einstein is only partially right. His equations are only correct under certain conditions and conscious observation is the key.Comments?

Myself and others have said this repeatedly. There is no paradox. If both ships travel the same (or mirror imaged) trajectories than the total time elapsed for each is the same.

When a ship is moving away from you, the relativistic Doppler effect redshifts the signal - or makes it look like time is slower. When a ship is moving towards you, the relativistic Doppler effect blueshifts the signal, or makes it look like time is faster.

The proper time experienced by a person on the ship (i.e. how much they age) is the time-integral of the inverse of the gamma factor. When moving in an inertial frame, proper time is equivalent to the time seen by and outside observer. In a non-inertial frame (like every one of your ``paradoxes'') this is not the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but the total speed is still the product of the vectorized combination of angular and main speed trajectory (I believe in most countries you have that in junior high). See http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~vawter/PhysicsNet/Topics/Vectors/TheVelocityVector.html

Now, as to the rotation, how much linear displacement does a pure rotation cause (not that such thing would exist in an isolated fashion in the non-theoretic world)? How much angular displacement? That is why I say it can be disregarded.

It comes down to the vectorized angular displacement components. And if you need energy X to cause a certain speed you do need the same energy to also create an equal angular speed. If you are using infinite energy to cause speed along a vector you cannot add an angular component because there is no more energy.

So you dont have a degree then?

If we take the speed of light to be 300,000 km per sec and I have a object travelling linear at 150,000 as well as rotationally at 150,000 km per sec what happens? is it impossible to do due to infinite energy being needed?

If you arent qualified dont answer please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have written NASA several times and they will not answer my questions. Nasa's website says they have observed time dilation by sending two clocks on airplanes in opposite directions around the earth and measured time dilation, but they don't tell you the whole story.

Here is my question to Nasa which they refuse to answer.

If two spaceships orbit (Ship A and Ship B ) the Earth in opposite directions at the same speed and the same orbital distance, they are observed to experience the same dilation as viewed by an observer C on Earth because the ship's motion is identical as viewed by C, but in opposite directions.

The two orbiting ships should also experience dilation between each other because they are moving in opposite directions to one another according to Nasa and Einstein.

Each has a clock on board. So as Ship A observes Ship B, Ship A sees Ship B experience dilation. The Ship B observer has his window covered and only notices his clock, So that the time as observed from Ship A is, A time > B time, and A time < C time. Now the guy on earth sees both experience the same time because they are both moving in reference to him at the same identical speed but in opposite directions. So, as viewed from C, A time = B time, C time > A time, therefore, C time > B time.

Now all three meet up at Cape Kennedy and compare clocks. The ship A guy sees the B clock showing less time and when the C person looks at the same clocks, he sees A's and B's clocks showing equal time. This examples shows there are two realities possible because Ship A sees B's and C's clock running slow while C sees A's and B's running slow. Now, B sees A and C running faster. So, how can clocks be running faster and slower at the same time in the same reference frame (reality) unless different realities are possible.

So, who is right?

They all are right because there are two possible realities in this scenario (ship A's reality and C's reality). There are not three realities because B had his window covered and didn't observe.

Now, what happens if the guy in Ship B opens his window and looks back at ship A at the same time ship A is watching Ship B experience time dilation. Ship A and Ship B see the other experiencing dilation. So when they arrive on earth and meet up with C, A sees B's and C's clock run slower, B sees A's and C's clock run slower, and C sees both A's and B's clock run slower. This indicates 3 possible realities. The only difference is that B decided to observe. So, by adding a third observer, we have created a third reality.

Actually this indicates different realities are possible for every conscious being who observes other conscious beings from different points in space-time since no conscious being can occupy the same space at the same time as another conscious being.

So, what does this mean? This means our reality is an illusion.

You won't hear NASA or anyone else solve this paradox. They can't. And you won't hear them even discuss it either. They won't let the cat out of the bag. This will cause worldwide panic because people can't accept it because this implies that nothing we view as real actually exists outside of our own minds because reality changes with observation and observation is created in the mind.

I expect heat from this, but solve the paradox and show me where reality doesn't change. To do so would prove Einstein wrong.

Actually, I believe Einstein is only partially right. His equations are only correct under certain conditions and conscious observation is the key.

Comments?

Schrodingers Cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is important to remember that the rules for special relativity apply to ``small point masses'' (like the rules for regular kinematics) if you want to extend those rules to a regular rigid body, you have to apply the rules separately to ``small parts'' of the body.

In short, the effect is cumulative - the centre of mass of your football will be going 99% c, while the outside parts may be going, say, between 99.9% and 89.1% c depending on the direction of rotation (these percentages are wrong, I didn't actually do the math, but you get the picture).

A person sitting on the football might think that the edges are rotating at 99% c, while a person outside the football will see them as rotating at 99.9% and the football moving at 99% c.

Note that as different parts of the football are traveling at different speeds, they have different masses and suffer different degrees of time dilation. The shape of the football will therefore be severely distorted when traveling in this manner.

So in effect I could build a spaceship with a rotating football inside hidden from view. My spaceship would only be capable of achieving 33% the speed of light in a linear direction before collapsing into a black hole if my football is rotating around 2 axis each at 33% the speed of light.

Is this the correct picture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you dont have a degree then?

If we take the speed of light to be 300,000 km per sec and I have a object travelling linear at 150,000 as well as rotationally at 150,000 km per sec what happens? is it impossible to do due to infinite energy being needed?

If you arent qualified dont answer please.

You mean that if the rotation is reverse to the direction of displacement, anything situated on the object that would not be moving?

Same if the object rotates in the direction of displacement.

Movement is relative. If you have nothing to relate it to there is no movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean that if the rotation is reverse to the direction of displacement, anything situated on the object that would not be moving?

Same if the object rotates in the direction of displacement.

Movement is relative. If you have nothing to relate it to there is no movement.

?

Think of a ufo spinning whilst travelling through space along a linear path. Both types of movement curve spacetime so if the ufo is spinning at 150,000 km per sec then it cant also be travelling more than 150,000 km per sec in a linear direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

?

Think of a ufo spinning whilst travelling through space along a linear path. Both types of movement curve spacetime so if the ufo is spinning at 150,000 km per sec then it cant also be travelling more than 150,000 km per sec in a linear direction.

The ufo travels in what direction? So why is the fact that it spins relevant? Unless of course it follows the same path as its spin.

Besides I doubt that anything spinning 150.000 km per second and smaller than a planet would stay in one piece long enough to brag about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The ufo travels in what direction? So why is the fact that it spins relevant? Unless of course it follows the same path as its spin.

Because an object spinning is an object distorting space-time. You really arent getting what I'm saying.

Imagine you put a shell in an artillery cannon. As the shell leaves grooves along the inside of the barrel cause it to spin. This means the shell levels the barrel traveling in a forward direction whilst its also rotating (due to its spin) in another.

Now imagine a situation where we are firing an object really fast using a super gun. The shell leaves our barrel spinning at 1/2 the speed of light. The question now is the forward motion limited to 1/2 the speed of light or the full speed of light.

If its 1/2 then angluar and linear motion are cumulative when it comes to warping space-time.

Thats the best I can do to explain it and I'm not going through it again. If you dont get it dont reply.

Edited by Alien Being

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because an object spinning is an object distorting space-time. You really arent getting what I'm saying.

Imagine you put a shell in an artillery cannon. As the shell leaves grooves along the inside of the barrel cause it to spin. This means the shell levels the barrel traveling in a forward direction whilst its also rotating (due to its spin) in another.

Now imagine a situation where we are firing an object really fast using a super gun. The shell leaves our barrel spinning at 1/2 the speed of light. The question now is the forward motion limited to 1/2 the speed of light or the full speed of light.

If its 1/2 then angluar and linear motion are cumulative when it comes to warping space-time.

Thats the best I can do to explain it and I'm not going through it again. If you dont get it dont reply.

Right...again, movement is relative, not absolute as you try to imply. It is not that I don't get but that you seem to have slept through the physics classes... unless engineers do not need any physics were you are.

And again, the speed of an object is measured as the product of all its movements. If you have half the speed of light in one vector direction plus half the speed of light in an angle to that vector in such a fashion that the product of both gives the speed of light you cannot accelerate the object anymore... unless you find a way to obtain more than infinite power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in effect I could build a spaceship with a rotating football inside hidden from view. My spaceship would only be capable of achieving 33% the speed of light in a linear direction before collapsing into a black hole if my football is rotating around 2 axis each at 33% the speed of light.

Is this the correct picture?

Again, it depends on what your frame of reference is.

If you are inside the space ship, moving at 33% light speed, you can rotate the football field at 99% light speed from your point of view (if you have sufficient energy).

Someone at rest relative to the space ship will see the football field moving at 99.9999% (or something) light speed - i.e. only moving 66.9999% light speed faster than the rest of the ship.

How can it look like the football field is going at 99% light speed inside a 33% light speed ship, while outside it looks like the football field is only going 66.9999% light speed compared to the ship?

Because from outside the ship it looks like the interior of the ship is suffering from time dilation (things occur at a slower rate) and length contraction (and they move a shorter distance).

Lorentz boosts (the coordinate transform which defines the time dilation, length contraction, mass increase, etc.) are required to make sure that an object accelerated to 99% light speed inside a 33% light speed ship doesn't look like it is traveling 132% light speed to an outside observer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Myself and others have said this repeatedly. There is no paradox. If both ships travel the same (or mirror imaged) trajectories than the total time elapsed for each is the same.

When a ship is moving away from you, the relativistic Doppler effect redshifts the signal - or makes it look like time is slower. When a ship is moving towards you, the relativistic Doppler effect blueshifts the signal, or makes it look like time is faster.

The proper time experienced by a person on the ship (i.e. how much they age) is the time-integral of the inverse of the gamma factor. When moving in an inertial frame, proper time is equivalent to the time seen by and outside observer. In a non-inertial frame (like every one of your ``paradoxes'') this is not the case.

To date you have not supplied an adequate answer and it isn't from a lack of trying. Just because you an others repeatedly say something, doesn't make it true. If you were correct, then NASA is wrong. And here is why!

The direction has nothing to do with relativity or objects orbiting the Earth would not experience dilation because the circular motion would cancel all the effects, but it doesn't. The reason is simple. It is the motion relative to another object, not the direction that makes relativity possible.

Now, can you explain what each of the observers in the scenario that I previously mentioned will see when they look at all three clocks side by side.

According to Eistein and NASA, each person should see diferent times on all clocks that are different from what each of the other observers witness.

So tell me how observer A can see a different time on the B clock than observer C sees on the same clock at the same time. If relativity works the way you say, then this is possible.

If you want to put real numbers to it, Try this. Both ship A and B orbit the earth in opposite directions at .49c and witnessed by the Earth observer,C; so that A and B's speed relative to each other is .98c. The flight is 100 hours as gauged by the Earth observer C clock.

Now you can calculate the lorentz factor for each. What do you get?

I did it for you.

The lorentz factor that the observer C on Earth sees both A and B experience is 1.14.

The lorentz factor that A observes B undergo at a 0.98c speed between them is 5.02.

When they all meet up, what do they see when they look at all the clocks side by side.

Observer C will see his clock state 100 hours has passed. Observer C will see A and B's clock with a hour indicator of 87.72 hours which is 100/1.14

Observer A will see his clock state 87.72 hours and he will see observer B's clock read 17.47 hours.

So, how can Observer C and Observer A see B's clock read 87.72 hours and 17.47 hours at the same time?

YOU SAY THERE IS NO PARADOX. I JUST SHOWED THERE IS.

Now am I wrong? If I am wrong, then NASA is wrong. NASA says objects rotating the Earth experience time dilation between them.

This is a very easy experiment to do by placing clocks on satellites. How come it hasn't been done?

I believe the answer is the same as why NASA hasn't answered my questions. BECAUSE THERE IS A PARADOX that shows different realities exist.

This is the big secret.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because an object spinning is an object distorting space-time. You really arent getting what I'm saying.

Imagine you put a shell in an artillery cannon. As the shell leaves grooves along the inside of the barrel cause it to spin. This means the shell levels the barrel traveling in a forward direction whilst its also rotating (due to its spin) in another.

Now imagine a situation where we are firing an object really fast using a super gun. The shell leaves our barrel spinning at 1/2 the speed of light. The question now is the forward motion limited to 1/2 the speed of light or the full speed of light.

If its 1/2 then angluar and linear motion are cumulative when it comes to warping space-time.

Thats the best I can do to explain it and I'm not going through it again. If you dont get it dont reply.

i dont think forward motion or spinning motion are dependent on each other. they are independent of each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schrodingers Cat.

Yes, and the paradox is real and only exist if someone opens the box the cat is in to see. So the paradox hinges on observation. When additional observers are added, additional paradox arise proving that our perception of reality is an illusion. I showed this to an 18 year old. She freaked out and started crying histerically. She couldn't handle it. This is why this is not discussed much in the main stream. It would be like yelling fire in the theatre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Right...again, movement is relative, not absolute as you try to imply. It is not that I don't get but that you seem to have slept through the physics classes... unless engineers do not need any physics were you are.

And again, the speed of an object is measured as the product of all its movements. If you have half the speed of light in one vector direction plus half the speed of light in an angle to that vector in such a fashion that the product of both gives the speed of light you cannot accelerate the object anymore... unless you find a way to obtain more than infinite power.

Why not. If you turn on your flashlight, the beam takes off at the speed of light from you even if others outside your reference frame see you going .99c. So, go chase the beam. You can always go faster, its just that others will never witness you going faster than c, and you will never catch your flashlight beam. This is because your reality is different than those outside your reference frame. Speed changes reality only if there is an outside reference frame observer. That's why dilation is possible.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To date you have not supplied an adequate answer and it isn't from a lack of trying. Just because you an others repeatedly say something, doesn't make it true. If you were correct, then NASA is wrong. And here is why!

The direction has nothing to do with relativity or objects orbiting the Earth would not experience dilation because the circular motion would cancel all the effects, but it doesn't. The reason is simple. It is the motion relative to another object, not the direction that makes relativity possible.

Now, can you explain what each of the observers in the scenario that I previously mentioned will see when they look at all three clocks side by side.

According to Eistein and NASA, each person should see diferent times on all clocks that are different from what each of the other observers witness.

So tell me how observer A can see a different time on the B clock than observer C sees on the same clock at the same time. If relativity works the way you say, then this is possible.

If you want to put real numbers to it, Try this. Both ship A and B orbit the earth in opposite directions at .49c and witnessed by the Earth observer,C; so that A and B's speed relative to each other is .98c. The flight is 100 hours as gauged by the Earth observer C clock.

Now you can calculate the lorentz factor for each. What do you get?

I did it for you.

The lorentz factor that the observer C on Earth sees both A and B experience is 1.14.

The lorentz factor that A observes B undergo at a 0.98c speed between them is 5.02.

When they all meet up, what do they see when they look at all the clocks side by side.

Observer C will see his clock state 100 hours has passed. Observer C will see A and B's clock with a hour indicator of 87.72 hours which is 100/1.14

Observer A will see his clock state 87.72 hours and he will see observer B's clock read 17.47 hours.

So, how can Observer C and Observer A see B's clock read 87.72 hours and 17.47 hours at the same time?

YOU SAY THERE IS NO PARADOX. I JUST SHOWED THERE IS.

Now am I wrong? If I am wrong, then NASA is wrong. NASA says objects rotating the Earth experience time dilation between them.

This is a very easy experiment to do by placing clocks on satellites. How come it hasn't been done?

I believe the answer is the same as why NASA hasn't answered my questions. BECAUSE THERE IS A PARADOX that shows different realities exist.

This is the big secret.

it has been done. GPS satellites have to recorrect themselves every now and then to fix for relativity issues. The experiment your thinking of was not sending clocks on two planes around. One clock was put on a rocket and another was on the surface. The predictions using relativity equations were proved correct.

I'm not going to try with you again. You just dont get it. You dont listen. Do you really think you're the first person to come up with this question?

Solution: Go to your nearest university and ask a physics professor. Physics professors get super excited if someone asks to talk about physics. Give it a shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

it has been done. GPS satellites have to recorrect themselves every now and then to fix for relativity issues. The experiment your thinking of was not sending clocks on two planes around. One clock was put on a rocket and another was on the surface. The predictions using relativity equations were proved correct.

I'm not going to try with you again. You just dont get it. You dont listen. Do you really think you're the first person to come up with this question?

Solution: Go to your nearest university and ask a physics professor. Physics professors get super excited if someone asks to talk about physics. Give it a shot

I have asked many. None have an answer. I have asked Nasa 6 times. They have no answer. They are all just as confused as you. I just showed you the paradox again. I calculated the lorentz factor for two of the three observers and showed you where the paradox is. You just don't believe your own eyes.

Oh, I get it. You are a believer. You believe what people tell you and write in your text book. You have been taught not to question authority.

So tell me, what does each of the observers clocks read in my example. Don't just say I am wrong and do not listen. BACK IT UP.

We have gone over this over and over and you won't open your eyes.

Now read the example, do the math, and see the paradox, or prove it doesn't exist. It's time to put up or shut up.

edit: If the lorentz transformation cals are correct, this proves the paradox exists. If the lorentz transformation collapses to one, the paradox can be avoided, and this would indicate Einstein is wrong. So which is it, the paradox exists or the equations collapse to a solution of 1.

You can't have it both ways.

I am taking your side and going with the equations, but the paradox keeps coming up and you keep ignoring it like it's not even there. Make it go away. 1+1 cannot equal 2, 3, 4, and 5, in one reality, just like a clock can't read 17.47 hours and 87.72 at the same time.

I bet you can't resolve the issue just like all the professors and Nasa professionals. Sometimes it is better to ignore the question in hopes that it goes away.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

it has been done. GPS satellites have to recorrect themselves every now and then to fix for relativity issues. The experiment your thinking of was not sending clocks on two planes around. One clock was put on a rocket and another was on the surface. The predictions using relativity equations were proved correct.

Regarding the satellites. Yes, they have to correct for dilation which proves dilation happens when the Earth is considered a stationary observer.

But what happens when you put an observer on the satellite and compare the satellites dilation in reference to other satellites in motion relative to it. The observer on the satellite will observe a different reality taking place on the other satellite than will be observed from Earth or any other satellite or reference frame similar to my example. So when they all come back together and meet in one reference frame, either different realities will exist or the lorentz transformation results for each observer are wrong and will have to collapse to 1.

I wish you could come up with a solution that works, but you can't.

And since you can't, this leads to the possibility that reality is different for everyone everywhere since we are all in motion to one another. This means that reality is slightly different for every person, but we can't notice it because the effects are so small and our speeds are so small when compared to c.

This leads back to reality being an illusion because space-time is a variable.

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here is another scenario. What happens when a satellite is in geosyncronized orbit. The satellite is moving around the earth at incredible speed compared to the speed of an observer on Earth. Does dilation happen and What is the lorentz factor?

Since the satellite is in geosyncronized orbit, the satellite doesn't appear to move in relation to a stationary observor on Earth. It stays in the same place. That's what makes the satellite dish work on one's roof. It stays tuned right on the satellite that appears to stay in the same place, but it doesn't. The satellite matches the Earth's angular velocity.

If you observed the satellite from the moon, it would move in reference to you because from the moon, you would see it move around the earth. So the moon observer sees the satellite dilate and an Earth observer sees the satellite as stationary even though it is moving.

So, the earth observer and moon observer see a different reality for the satellite. The moon would see the satellite clock slow and the Earth would see no difference in the satellite clock and the earth clock (lorentz factor = 1). The lorenzt transformation will not work for a geosyncronized satellite even though the satellite is moving around the earth at 24,000 mph. This is so because there is no movement in relation to the stationary observer on earth unless the observer is standing on one of the poles. Then, the satellite will appear to rotate like a satellite not in geosyncronized orbit.

But this violates the lorentz transformation and Einstein. If you plug in the velocity of the satellite in the lorentz equations, it gives a result larger than 1, but how can that be if there is no motion between the observer and satellite?

Comments?

Edited by Astute One

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another scenario. What happens when a satellite is in geosyncronized orbit. The satellite is moving around the earth at incredible speed compared to the speed of an observer on Earth. Does dilation happen and What is the lorentz factor?

Since the satellite is in geosyncronized orbit, the satellite doesn't appear to move in relation to a stationary observor on Earth. It stays in the same place. That's what makes the satellite dish work on one's roof. It stays tuned right on the satellite that appears to stay in the same place, but it doesn't. The satellite matches the Earth's angular velocity.

If you observed the satellite from the moon, it would move in reference to you because from the moon, you would see it move around the earth. So the moon observer sees the satellite dilate and an Earth observer sees the satellite as stationary even though it is moving.

So, the earth observer and moon observer see a different reality for the satellite. The moon would see the satellite clock slow and the Earth would see no difference in the satellite clock and the earth clock (lorentz factor = 1). The lorenzt transformation will not work for a geosyncronized satellite even though the satellite is moving around the earth at 24,000 mph. This is so because there is no movement in relation to the stationary observer on earth unless the observer is standing on one of the poles. Then, the satellite will appear to rotate like a satellite not in geosyncronized orbit.

Comments?

Asking questions on these forums is a nightmare and do you notice that my requests of them stating why they are qualified to talk about gravity have been ignored?

If I take a flat disk and rotate it in one direction, flip it in another, shoot it along a linear path all at close to lightspeed the objects warping of spacetime would exceed what is thought to be possible. I think there in lays the answer to the supposed existance of dark matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.