Notices
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 201 to 204 of 204

Thread: Proof there exists spherical light waves in the rest frame t

  1. #201  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chinglu View Post
    There is no requirement for that same wave front to appear spherical in both frames of reference, in fact that is impossible due to relativity of simultaneity.
    That's correct and that is SR.
    Are you claiming that if a frame sees a light sphere, then some other frame does not see a light sphere for that same object?
    Read Einstein, both frames must see a spherical object.
    So, you are wrong.
    How many times...?
    Both observers see light spheres in their own frames, regardless of their state of motion. However, because of relativity of simultaneity, they do not see the same events at the same times - only when you adjust for that effect both of them see spheres when looking at one another. This only works if you use Lorentz transformations, because light speed is finite.
    Without Lorentz transformations both observers would see different speeds of light, contrary to empirical evidence.

    Btw, would you care to explain how both observers can possibly see the same wave ?

    QUOTE]Einstein: "The wave under consideration is therefore no less a spherical wave with velocity of propagation c when viewed in the moving system. This shows that our two fundamental principles are compatible"
    Please quote to us the two sentences and equations before this as well. And then tell us please what the propagation speed of those wave fronts is. And then tell us also how you get from one relation to the other.

    Refer also here : Lorentz Transformations

    I quote :

    "Imagine the light shell as O′ sees itat the instant t′ she sees a sphere of radius r′, in particular she sees the light to have reached the spots +r′ and r′ on the x′ axis. But from O′s point of view the expanding light sphere does not reach the point +r′ at the same time it reaches r′! (This is just the old story of synchronizing the two clocks at the front and back of the train one more time.) That is why O does not see O′s sphere: the arrival of the light at the sphere of radius r′ around O′ at time t′ corresponds in S to a continuum of different events happening at different times. "
    [/QUOTE]

    How many times...?
    Both observers see light spheres in their own frames, regardless of their state of motion


    Very good. Now LT is supposed to translate this physical fact.

    But, it cannot, that is what I proved. LT is not capable of proving each frame will see a light sphere centered at its origin.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #202  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    I am awaiting your mathematical refutation of post 195.
    No problem.
    But, until you are able to understand that LT cannot prove that each frame views a light sphere at its origin, you will not understand my math.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #203  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    661
    Quote Originally Posted by Markus Hanke View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chinglu View Post
    So, SR is commanded to produce 2 light spheres in the view of each frame centered at the origin of the frame. If not, then SR is false. Therefore, the lorentz transformations are required to produce 2 spherical light waves or SR is false.

    Here, this mainstream website proves this.

    Paradox of Special Relativity
    What the website says is this :

    "The inevitable conclusion is that Cerulean must measure space and time along axes which are skewed relative to Vermilion's. Events which happen at the same time according to Cerulean happen at different times according to Vermilion; and vice versa. Cerulean's hypersurfaces of simultaneity are not the same as Vermilion's."

    and also

    "Most of the apparent paradoxes of special relativity arise because observers moving at different velocities relative to each other have different notions of simultaneity. "

    So, the very source you referenced explaines clearly and unambiguously that any paradox one might suspect exists is only apparent, because the observers do not have the same notion of simultaneity.
    All that is proved here is your ignorance of these concepts, and your inability to even study these sources properly. I would urge you to very carefully read through that entire site, it will explain all your confusions.
    Oh?

    Well, can you use LT and prove each frame views a light sphere?

    That means assume one frame views a light sphere and prove the other frame is viewing a light sphere based on using LT.

    I will help you.

    Einstein: "The wave under consideration is therefore no less a spherical wave with velocity of propagation c when viewed in the moving system. This shows that our two fundamental principles are compatible.5"
    On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies

    Show the math. Prove with LT that the other frame is viewing a spherical light wave.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #204  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    Show the math. Prove with LT that the other frame is viewing a spherical light wave.
    Frame 1 :



    Frame 2, after transformation :



    which is exactly



    So where exactly is your alleged problem/contradiction/paradox ? This is exactly as described in the document your referenced.

    No problem.
    But, until you are able to understand that LT cannot prove that each frame views a light sphere at its origin, you will not understand my math.
    Your turn. Show the general proof that the equations in post 195 are not Lorentz invariant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •