Re: lawless physics (fwd)

["Bob Sciamanda" <trebor@velocity.net>]

What you say is true John, but somewhat reckless without clarification.
At the very least: ". . . there is *no* limit on "how fast" you can get
from one place to another . . ." , AS "MEASURED" (really, calculated)
FROM YOUR FRAME.  (Which is not all that might "possibly matter to an
individual".)

I would add that there is a restriction on getting from one "event" to
another;  something which might well "possibly matter to an individual".
A space traveler leaving earth might well be interested in what earth
events he can return to, for example.

Bob Sciamanda   sciamanda@edinboro.edu
Dept of Physics   trebor@velocity.net
Edinboro Univ of PA  http://www.edinboro.edu/~sciamanda/home.html
Edinboro, PA   (814)838-7185


-----Original Message-----
From: John Mallinckrodt <ajmallinckro@CSUPomona.Edu>
To: phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu <phys-l@atlantis.uwf.edu>
Cc: AJMALLINCKRO@CSUPomona.Edu <AJMALLINCKRO@CSUPomona.Edu>
Date: Monday, March 16, 1998 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: lawless physics (fwd)


> > I try to discuss the theory of relativity without invoking an
> > invisible proscriptive force that refuses to allow anything to
> > travel faster than the speed of light. I try to consistently
> > present the idea that relativity is a theoretical model that
> > encodes a history of observations of the behavior of light
> > with a mathematical restriction on travelling faster than
> > v=1. The math is not the reality or the enforcement of the
> > reality, it is an encoding of a history of observation that
> > has so far been consistent with further observation.
>
> Having just finished teaching Special Relativity, I have a very
different
> take on this "proscription."  I try to make sure that students come away
> from the course understanding the important fact that there is *no*
limit
> on "how fast" you can get from one place to another (which is all that
can
> possibly matter to a traveler) and, therefore, precious little meaning
to
> the notion that nature imposes any kind of "speed limit."  The fact that
> no observer can *measure* a material object to be traveling faster than
> the speed of light is a statement about *measurements* of space and
time,
> not about "how fast something can move."  And since one person's "faster
> than light" is another person's "backward in time," all that nature is
> really proscribing is acausality.
>
> John
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> A. John Mallinckrodt      http://www.intranet.csupomona.edu/~ajm
> Professor of Physics    mailto:ajmallinckro@csupomona.edu
> Physics Department       voice:909-869-4054
> Cal Poly Pomona            fax:909-869-5090
> Pomona, CA 91768-4031   office:Building 8, Room 223