How can Relativity be both true and false at the same time?

Not quite philosophy discussions, debates, various thought experiments and other topics of interest.

Re: How can Relativity be both true and false at the same ti

Postby Odal on October 24th, 2017, 2:19 pm 

Let me remind you that you have not presented a single valid argument for your views or against mine. In the end all you had was the power of a moderator. enjoy it.

I find it strange that you are so set against my proposal. After all, if you are right in your "scientific" convictions then you should not doubt the result.

I would think that you would be the first to welcome such an experiment: what better way to shut all dissident voices up?

Unless of course your are not sure of the outcome?
Odal
Banned User
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 17 Oct 2017
Blog: View Blog (1)


Re: How can Relativity be both true and false at the same ti

Postby BurtJordaan on October 24th, 2017, 2:30 pm 

I don't think that I've ever been more sure of an outcome.

In any case, this is my last response on this topic.

Cheers.
User avatar
BurtJordaan
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: 17 Oct 2009
Location: South Africa
Blog: View Blog (9)


Re: How can Relativity be both true and false at the same ti

Postby mitchellmckain on October 24th, 2017, 2:58 pm 

I would judge that the use of the word "bigotry" is not only a poor fit but inappropriate -- an insult to all the victims of real bigotry everywhere. What I do see in Odal is either the lack of ability or unwillingness to listen/read and learn. He has ignored my explanation that relativity is about the structure of space-time rather than light (EM radiation) and this seems to be the crux of both his misunderstanding and suggestion. I suspect that like many of the youth today immersed in the trekkie/sci-fi fantasies of ftl travel he doesn't want to believe in the realities discovered by honest scientific inquiry. If someone wanted to take a poke at me they might compare my religious beliefs to these science fiction fantasies, and I would be good-natured about it, laughing with them even (but I would point out that I DO conform my religious beliefs to what science discovers, giving science the higher epistemological status).
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Member
 
Posts: 686
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: How can Relativity be both true and false at the same ti

Postby Odal on October 24th, 2017, 3:04 pm 

I am 64 years old. And all you have done is regurgitate book knowledge. You have not, one single moment engaged the issue: is light an em wave as is assumed by all scientists, and can we prove it? The rest is just to show off your knowledge of irrelevant facts.
If you think that this issue has been answered already then it should not be too difficult to give precise answers and references instead of pompous lectures.

So, yes, I stand by my formulation: bigotry.
Odal
Banned User
 
Posts: 62
Joined: 17 Oct 2017
Blog: View Blog (1)


Re: How can Relativity be both true and false at the same ti

Postby mitchellmckain on October 24th, 2017, 7:32 pm 

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote:I am 64 years old.

So? I have seen a lot of Trekkies that old.

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote: And all you have done is regurgitate book knowledge.

Wrong! Show me the book where you can find what I said. OH!!! I know what you mean. You are talking about an education -- that is, knowing what other people have said before you start spouting off yourself. Well it is true, an education isn't exactly necessary when you making up fantasy stories, preaching from a pulpit, or shooting bull in a bar. Gosh, this attitude against book larnin' is really old -- a favorite of the willfully ignorant of all ages.

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote: You have not, one single moment engaged the issue: is light an em wave as is assumed by all scientists, and can we prove it?

That is because it is not the issue. If you wanted to talk about Maxwell's equations, or optics then the view of light as a transverse wave of alternating perpendicular electric and magnetic fields might have been relevant. But in relativity it doesn't matter what light is and indeed I could teach a whole course on relativity without mentioning light even once.

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote: The rest is just to show off your knowledge of irrelevant facts.

In other words, you didn't respond because you couldn't understand some of the words. I see. I generally don't down to people with an elementary school version of science unless they ask for it first.

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote:So, yes, I stand by my formulation: bigotry.

Oh! So you were the one using that word. In that case, maybe it does apply. I frequently see people trying to cry bigotry when people criticize their beliefs, especially when those same beliefs are used to justify real bigotry against other people.

Odal » October 24th, 2017, 2:04 pm wrote:If you think that this issue has been answered already then it should not be too difficult to give precise answers and references instead of pompous lectures.

Ask a question and I will give you an answer. And just in case you missed my answers the first time...

...back to the OP...

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:How can Relativity be both true and false at the same time?

It isn't.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:(Special) Relativity is very much counter-intuitive, and it is hard for people who just got acquainted with it to accept its seeming illogic logic.
I am one of those people. I still find Relativity a monstrosity as far as intuitive logic is concerned.

Where have you got this "law of the universe" that everything must be simple, intuitive and easy?

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:But we can ask ourselves, how can such a monstrosity be so successful?

Because it is correct, and plenty of people have no difficulty with using it.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote: How can it convince so many intelligent people of its validity, and at the same time oppose our deepest intuitions?

Because those are not everyone's deepest intuitions and they are wrong.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:Is the universe then so irrational that we have to abandon our intuitive logic to understand it?

No. Relativity does not require anything of the sort. All it requires it for you to open up your mind to a world bigger than your back yard.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:That was Bohr's position, and even though Einstein refused to follow him in this special brand of mysticism, it was Einstein who flooded the gates open.

Substantiate this please. I am pretty certain all the disputes between Bohr and Einstein were regarding quantum physics not relativity.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:The purpose of this thread is to propose a way out of this conundrum: to accept Einstein's (Special) Relativity, and at the same time reaffirm the preponderance of our everyday logic.

Relativity reaffirms the our everyday logic. It just shows that it doesn't extend beyond the everyday limits.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:I would like to start with a very familiar argument, the constant speed of light and its paradoxes.

In its simplest form it concerns the case of two ships flying in opposite direction at a speed (or velocity) close to c. Our logic tells us that they would be separating at a speed equal to the sum of both their speeds.
SR tells us that each will measure the speed of light as being no more than c.

Quite a conundrum, isn't it?

That sounds like Galilean physics not logic. Before Galileo physics it was Aristotle, who taught that things fell at a speed proportional to their weight. If people said that was just what logic tells us, it is because they never bothered to actually measure how fast things fell.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:There is a very simple answer to this problem though, even if it flies at the face of scientific orthodoxy as defined by 20th century Physics.

If we consider light as a local phenomenon, as I have argued in another thread, then logic can be rescued from the irrational explanations quantic and relativist theorists are so fond of.

As an effect of em waves, light, in any setting can never go faster than c.

It does not matter whether we take one long train or two ships moving in opposite direction, any em wave in any frame of reference will create light effects that can only go as fast or slower than c.

Indeed and that should tell you something. No matter how fast you go chasing after light, it continues to move away from you at 300000 km per second. Think about that what that means. That is just what you would expect of something infinite. You can never catch up.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:Of course, once we have done that, we must abandon all the cosmological pretensions that follow from the idea of a mysterious universal constant.

No... what you get is relativity, because that is the basic premise of relativity. Only this is not about light and it never has been.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:What we are saying in fact is simply that em waves cannot make matter light up any faster than c, wherever that matter is.

c = approximately 300000 km/s is the speed in a vacuum of all mass-less particles. It is not just light. Light just happens to be the massless particle called a photon. But this is just one of many. Particles with mass always travel less than 300000 km/s and particles without mass always travel at 300000 km/s.

Odal » October 22nd, 2017, 6:19 pm wrote:Quite a let down, wouldn't you say?

I am sorry you feel let down by your inability to understand relativity. I am sure there are a lot of things you are into which I wouldn't understand either.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Member
 
Posts: 686
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Previous

Return to Odds & Ends

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests