Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Relativity conundrum



[debate labeled in time sequence]


> Pentcho Valev wrote:
...
> > 1. The person DOES NOT KNOW that the train is moving with a speed v with
> > respect to the railway. So he/she obtains c' = x'/t, where x' is the
distance
> > between the sides of the train and t is the time measured.
>

Ken Caviness responded:

> This is all the person can do, using distance & time as measured by meter
> sticks & clocks at rest in her own reference frame.
>
/snip/
> This is in incomplete, mixed-reference-frame treatment of the
problem. If the
> person on the train insists on using distances (*) as measured by
observers on
> the platform, why is she so inconsistent as to use _time_ as measured
by _her_
> clocks (*)?
/snip/
> She could use time as measured by clocks at rest with respect to
> the station platform,

At 07:22 PM 4/21/2003 +0200, Pentcho, you wrote:

How could she do this? She would have to leave her frame and move to the
other one -
I am not sure this is unproblematic with respect to the conventional
theory (if time
is constant this is unproblematic).

/snip/

Pentcho


To address only this question, a train observer who requires a stationary
associate
to mail in the results of a time interval determination taken in the
stationary frame
resolves the concern - only the observation need be specified in space time.

Brian Whatcott