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: importance of Einstein



On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:44:18 -0400, Ken Caviness <caviness@SOUTHERN.EDU>
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 02:17:06 -0700, Pentcho Valev <valevp@BAS.BG>, wrote:

First let us solve the following problem. Relativity is
based on the axiom according to which the speed of light is costant in
all
inertial frames. Now ASSUME this axiom is false.

Why should we assume to be false something that has been verified to the
highest precision we can measure?


We can PROVE it is false since it produces absurd couples of propositions
of the type (p, not-p). As you know, length contraction is a corollary of
the axiom so let us consider the following textbook example:

"Two bombs lie on a train platform, a distance L apart. As a train passes by
at constant speed,the bombs explode simultaneously (in the platform frame)
and leave marks on the train. Due to the length contraction of the train,
the marks on the train will be a distance gamma*L apart when viewed in the
train's frame (since this distance is what is length-contracted down to the
given distance L in the platform frame)."

Millions of professors have taught this example and yet nobody has found it
suitable to introduce the following modifications. The bombs are replaced
with two barriers which are simultaneously (in the platform frame) stretched
across the railway. The barriers are strong enough to be able to stop the
train. Also, the length of the train is L', a value limited by L<L'<gamma*L.

Is the barrier mechanism capable of "catching" the train? The observer in
the platform frame will first say "yes" since, in this frame, the moving
train is shorter than L. Then the same observer will say "no" since the
train cannot remain length-contracted after joining the platform frame.
Finally, millions of relativists will say "never mind" since for them
relativity is a cult, not a theory that should be verified.

Of course, if for some reason you don't like this textbook example, we
could analyse others.



What do we do: A)
Immediately reject the false axiom and all its corollaries. B) Continue
to
use the theory untill a better one emerges.

You want "A", clearly. But in fact, even wrong theories are useful.


For education or generally? What do you think may happen in students' minds
when studying such wrong theories? Has the decline in the number of physics
students anything to do with this?


From the above I deduce two things: (1) That you believe that you have
found
a mistake in the derivation of the "redshift factor" [I'm all ears, please
tell us],


First see the respective derivation in Appendix 3 in Einstein's
"Relativity". Do you find it reasonable? Note the dependence of the time
dilation/contraction on the gravitational potential, and remember that in
the 1905 paper the same time dilation/contraction is independent of the
acceleration (gravitational field).

Pentcho Valev