Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

This is not an everything goes forum, but rather a place to ask questions and request help for developing your ideas.

Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 4:05 pm 

A more important question is do you agree with Positor's statement:

"The frame of the distance markers etc is not an absolute frame."
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 4:07 pm 

Ralph, why do you need another person to ask you? Either you can show why Greene's Proxima Centauri video is wrong or you can't. If you can, you've got a Nobel prize with your name on it. If you can't, you got nothin'. This is not a matter of personalities, but of science and maths.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 4:13 pm 

No Dave, I heartily believe no one else here doesn't think I'm wrong on this. I also believe no matter how I prove it to you, it'll make no difference in your beliefs so I'll be wasting my time. However, it'll be worth trying to save another person. Now how about answering my question which is very important to me.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 4:16 pm 

LOL, put up or shut up! YOU raised Greene -- you said he was your only exposure to relativity.

Show us where he's wrong.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 4:29 pm 

Dave I'll let you off the hook. Since I know these videos like the back of my hand, here's Greene addressing a very similar problem using only time dilation. No sweat on my part because you will believe whatever Greene tells you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AM41pwe ... UgDLTwVbFc

PS I never said he was wrong in this case, I said you were wrong. Maybe you should look at all the videos. You're welcome.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 5:23 pm 

In your link, he's resolving the twin paradox without invoking acceleration. YOUR most recent claim is that all relativistic scenarios can be resolved either using time dilation, or length contraction, but not both. The above linked video does NOT claim this. It's about acceleration, not Lorentz contraction.

Your'e saying Greene is right in his Proxima Centauri scenario, but I'm wrong? Are you daft? Or are you just trolling at this point, since you have nothing left to lose? Let's be clear: Greene states, and shows mathematically, in the Proxima Centauri video, that both time dilation and length contraction must be factored into the equation. This is what YOU deny. So your dispute is CLEARLY with Greene, and not with me, for I have just summarized what he has shown.

So since you are saying that Greene is wrong, show how he is wrong, please.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 5:29 pm 

And he shows that the 12 ly trip from earth takes 13 yrs. No mention about length contraction. Are you confused that the number 12 does not equal 5? Is that where you're stuck? How can these videos be about the same thing since proxima centauri is 5 ly away and not 12. Are you kidding me? This isn't even algebra, this is arithmetic. I believe he even states in the video for other Daves who may be watching, on how can Alice travel 12 ly in 5 years, isn't that faster than light? And then he explains it.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 5:34 pm 

:-D

Ralph, you need to get a job, or a new hobby, or something. You have no idea what you are talking about.

One more time, Ralph: this is utterly clear to anyone who watches the Greene video. Greene is saying you need both time dilation and length contraction together. Your most recent video is NOT about this; it is about resolving the twin paradox without invoking acceleration. it's a different subject.

You have claimed that Greene's Proxima Centauri video is wrong. Please show how. Put up or shut up.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 5:38 pm 

ralfcis » October 8th, 2018, 3:29 pm wrote: No mention about length contraction.


Lorentz, or length contraction, is mentioned at about 8:20 of this video.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 5:39 pm 

Yes, the outbound leg of the twin paradox is the same thing as Alice leaving earth and reaching a planet. In the 1st example the planet is 5 ly and in the 2nd it's 12. Oh I see what you're saying, it's not 5, the two examples can't possibly be related. buhbye Dave.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 6:11 pm 

Damn I should have kept watching, he does mention length contraction. Here's how it's done with only time dilation:

2.jpg


The thin red velocity line is 12/13 c.

The distance is 12 ly

v=x/t so t=x/v = 12(13/12) = 13

What is Alice's dilated time when t=13?

Y=13/5

t=Yt' or t'=t/Y = 13/(13/5) = 5.

The blue line is Bob's line of present or line of simultaneity.

Now what is Bob's dilated time from Alice's perspective?

t'= Yt" or t"=t'/Y = 5(13/5) =25/13.

The thick red line is Alice's line of simultaneity which is just the inverse slope of the thin red line.

Exactly what Greene got without me mentioning length contraction. I must've been mistaken about which video Greene didn't use length contraction so I felt obliged to work out this answer for you which you undoubtedly won't accept.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 6:32 pm 

Ok this is the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEJLWOt ... c&index=63

So can I take the cash instead of the Nobel prize you promised me? I've been mostly out of work since 2001 so a million would help out a lot.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 6:46 pm 

ralfcis » October 8th, 2018, 4:11 pm wrote:Damn I should have kept watching, he does mention length contraction.


:-D

Oh, dear, I thought you knew these videos like the back of your hand?

Buh-bye, Ralfie!
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 6:55 pm 

Well I was off by one. Too bad you're not familiar with any of them. And now your thread is ended.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 7:10 pm 

So back to business. Anyone else support Positor's pledge of fealty, I mean, support that I'm not an absolutist?
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 7:52 pm 

Would you show now why Greene’s explanation (not mine, though of course I agree with it) of how both time dilation and length contraction are necessary to understand the Proxima Centauri scenario is wrong, or will you have a big cup of STFU?

Never mind, I know you won’t do either.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 8:17 pm 

Dave, I've already done that and I pointed to the video that supports that. He never stated both are necessary, he just happened to solve the problem that way that time. Then he solved it another way in the last video link. Would you not agree that the muon example can be solved either way. Dave, I can only lead you so far but I can't make you drink. So let's just leave it here.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 8th, 2018, 8:29 pm 

Sure, you have no idea what you are talking about, and Greene contradicts everything you say, so let's just leave it here.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 8:38 pm 

Dave go back a few posts, maybe you never saw them.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby TheVat on October 8th, 2018, 9:58 pm 

It helps if one doesn't take length contraction too literally. The change in apparent linear scale and apparent time dilation are equivalent. Just ask a muon. Muon "sees" length contraction of the atmosphere, scientist sees (infers from survival rate at ground) time dilation.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6890
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 10:03 pm 

Are you saying you agree with me? How about an amen that I'm not an absolutist so long as you're here.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby Positor on October 8th, 2018, 10:10 pm 

ralfcis » October 8th, 2018, 11:11 pm wrote:The thin red velocity line is 12/13 c.

The distance is 12 ly

v=x/t so t=x/v = 12(13/12) = 13

What is Alice's dilated time when t=13?

Y=13/5

t=Yt' or t'=t/Y = 13/(13/5) = 5.

If Alice's dilated time is 5 years, she must see the 12ly length-contracted to less than 5ly, since nothing can be observed to travel faster than c. (Unless there is something I have misunderstood.)
Positor
Active Member
 
Posts: 1090
Joined: 05 Feb 2010


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 8th, 2018, 10:17 pm 

Perspective. Using her dilated time and Bob's proper space is not v, it's v'. V can't be greater than c but v' can be infinite. In Alice's slowed time from Bob's perspective, she can cover more of his proper space. You must have heard Alice can travel the universe in a second by going very close to c. It's because Y can be infinite so v'=Yv means v' can be infinite. v'=Yx/t=x/t'. Is there no one to back me up on this?
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 9th, 2018, 5:34 am 

Braininvat

Braininvat said

Muon "sees" length contraction of the atmosphere, scientist sees (infers from survival rate at ground) time dilation.


Here is the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnwELPm ... c&index=21

Greene also mostly (but not always) uses length contraction to figure out time from the moving perspective and time dilation from the stationary perspective to figure out time. Absolutely no need for this switch of methods based on perspective. The moving perspective can figure out time directly by using time dilation from its perspective as I showed in my STD. There is no need for length contraction ever.

So I still don't know if Biv explicitly agrees with this and whether or not his opinion stands that I'm an absolutist. Clearing up these points from the moderator would give me some credibility so I could move on without rehashing the same points over and over. Stepping in to settle disputes can reduce needless friction and personal attacks on threads.

And in my finer point to Dave, Greene does not mix both length contraction and time dilation from the same perspective. He will only use one or the other per perspective. The only time in relativity that length contraction and time dilation are used concurrently is in explaining the constancy of the speed of light. I think this anomaly supports my argument that if the two can't be normally mixed, why have this one exception when it's not at all needed to explain the constancy of c. Without length contraction, c would be c not infinity from its own perspective. There'll be no more talk that it takes 0 time to travel the universe from its perspective. There is no need for length contraction ever.

But if you admit that, then you'd have to re-write one of relativity's main tenets that the speed of light is constant for all frames because time dilation and length contraction work hand in hand to make it possible. My explanation of why its possible is due to other reasons as I've repeatedly shown.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby TheVat on October 9th, 2018, 10:17 am 

TBH, I don't quite follow your theory, but that's due to time needed to spend elsewhere in SPCF. As long as you understand observer frames and that c is a constant of separation, you should be OK. Light is the only real clock and c is the universal clock rate. I will try to read 2.0 and all of 3.0 sometime this week.

It's worth remembering that we express distance in terms of light. Proxima is four light years. It takes light four years, from an observer perspective, to travel that distance. So a time dilation that makes an astronaut observer cover it in two years is a length contraction of the path for the astronaut and a length contraction of the ship for a "stationary" observer. It's all scale diddling and there's no preferred perspective.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6890
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 9th, 2018, 11:08 am 

Ralf, if you’re really saying (at this point I’m not even sure what you’re saying) that relativity can be recast as only time dilation without length contraction, then explain — in plain English, please, without an STD, as this ought to easy for you to explain — the Proxima Centauri example.

If there were no length contraction, it must follow that both Alice, in her moving frame, and Bob, in his at-rest frame, would agree that the distance to PC is 4.25 light years. Yet when Alice arrives at PC, her clock will have ticked off 3.19 years. How, on your model, did Alice arrive at P.C. faster than the speed of light?
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 9th, 2018, 12:31 pm 

I don't always agree with Dave (usually never) but for some reason he still enlightens me. For example I've found time contraction (my definition) and length contraction to be the same thing except one is expressed in light years and the other one has the same numerical value in years. So the length contraction to proxima centauri equals the time contraction except for the units. So again, no need for length contraction. The time contraction line is also the line of present, now slice, line of simultaneity and Alice's perspective of Bob's time dilation from Bob's perspective of Alice's time dilation. (Bob t=5, Alice's t'=4, Bob's contracted t"=3.2 for example)

2.0 only has some still valid parts. 3.0 is correct and it references the valid parts of 2.0.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby ralfcis on October 9th, 2018, 12:42 pm 

She did not. Light still arrived before her from her perspective. The explanation is handled differently in relativity but in ralfativity, what you say is faster than light speed in Alice's frame is measured using her dilated clocks wrt Bob and the agreed upon distance markers from Bob's proper distance frame (so she calculates it as c) and light speed in bob's frame is also c and using his clocks, Alice's speed can never go above c even though in her frame she's seeing the distance markers pass by her at greater than c. But if she sends a light signal in her frame, it beats her to her destination no matter how close to c she travels. All this without length contraction. It's in the math I showed v=x/t and v'=Yv etc. You're going to have to understand the math.
ralfcis
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 19 Jun 2013
Location: Ottawa Canada


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 9th, 2018, 12:54 pm 

She's seeing the "distance markers," whatever those are, pass by her faster than c! Right-o! So there is faster than light travel in "ralfativity."

I'm not even going to attempt to parse the rest of this above hash, except to point out that if the distance markers were traveling by her faster than c, she would never see them at all.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


Re: Ralfativity 3.0 The cause of age difference

Postby davidm on October 9th, 2018, 1:19 pm 

Ralf, just a simple question. You only need to supply two numbers.

In Alice's frame, traveling wrt at-rest Bob, under "ralfativity," how distant does she measure PC to be?

When she gets there, how much time does she read having passed on her clock?

Just two numbers.
davidm
Member
 
Posts: 442
Joined: 05 Feb 2011


PreviousNext

Return to Personal Theories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests