Re: [Phys-l] how to prove relativity

[Stefan Jeglinski <jeglin@4pi.com>]

> So far nobody has presented any reasonable sequences which may begin to
> convince the non physicist of relativity.

I really disagree with this. Not only has the discussion been a 
correct way of looking at things, but as plausibility arguments go 
when faced with someone who may not even be able to understand much 
of kinematics, this goes an amazingly looong way. Before, given the 
so-called "traditional" way of describing relativity, one was left 
with "mathy" Lorentz transforms, and paradoxes. Cool to think about, 
but even less convincing.

>   And there is much more to relativity than just the "time dilation".

Perhaps, but the discussion so far has really captured a core essence 
IMHO. What's missing, for me personally, is to add a discussion of 
relativity of simultaneity. I believe this is superior to the 
discussion of accelerations in SR, in the same way the discussion of 
spacetime and path != distance is superior to the dilation and 
paradox presentations.


Stefan Jeglinski