It is.
The Prof once mentioned that the 2012 Nobel was in cosmology while arguing vigorously.
On the idea of time in physics-relativity
- Thread starter ash64449
- Start date
It is.
The Prof once mentioned that the 2012 Nobel was in cosmology while arguing vigorously.
yes it is
First, only unabashed cranks try to compare well-verified science to religion. The sort of people who try to leverage their stubbornly ignorant incredulity against their appalling lack of effort in understanding anything beyond a couple of half-remembered pop-sci analogies. What you sadly do not realize is that you are not even managing to say Einstein was wrong about anything, because you have yet to come anywhere near a competent enough understanding to make such an attempt.
Second, I have already explained how MMX does not address simultaneity, but you seem determined not to learn anything. Regardless, I will take another crack at it.
MMX only addresses the one frame where the experiment is performed, so obviously there is no observer in any different frame to dispute/compare simultaneity. But even if there were such an observer, all the events in the MMX are universally simultaneous, because both the emission and detection of the signal occur at the same places and times, respectively. No one disputes the observation that a photon struck a detection plate, as it happens at the same place and time. Relatively simultaneous events are separate in space, and thus cannot be universally said to occur at the same time, just like two lightning strikes separated by the length of a train.
So when are you going to make any argument that actually manages to address the TE you are uselessly flailing at?
I already have, it couldn't be made any more clear. It is a lost cause trying to explain it to you. Maybe I should give it one more try?
In the MMX, a beam of light is split. This insures that both beams are sent at the same time. They then travel in different directions against the motions of the Earth, in order to try and determine a difference in velocity against these motions. The beams are then converged back together. They are then compared to see if the frequency then matches up. The frequency then matches up. The beams arrive at the detector at the same time.
In Einsteins TE, the train velocity then causes the flashes of light to arrive at different time. Compare that to above where the beams of light arrive at the same time. The results of the two experiments are not the same. They have different results. The TE doesn't match the MMX, one says the beams arrive at the same time as compared to the objects motion, and the other says that the beams will arrive at different times.
These are different results of the same events taking place. Is there a part you didn't understand about this? Is there something that may need to be explained further? Is there a part I should go over in more detail? You should't be afraid to ask questions, there is no such thing as a dumb question. No one will make fun of you if there is a part of this that you do not understand. It is okay if you don't understand any part of this, I could go over it in more detail if you like.
Einstein's train thought experiment is not the same as the MME.
One difference is that in the train thought experiment, there are two separate events at different locations that initiate the light flashes, while in the MME, the light flashes originate from a single event and are reflected back to their original location (in the lab frame).
A second difference is that in the MME, the light flashes are moving at right angles to each other (in the lab frame), while in the train, the light flashes are moving in opposite directions.
The MME is about length contraction in the Sun rest frame.
The train thought experiment is about relativity of simultaneity.
One difference is that in the train thought experiment, there are two separate events at different locations that initiate the light flashes, while in the MME, the light flashes originate from a single event and are reflected back to their original location (in the lab frame).
A second difference is that in the MME, the light flashes are moving at right angles to each other (in the lab frame), while in the train, the light flashes are moving in opposite directions.
The MME is about length contraction in the Sun rest frame.
The train thought experiment is about relativity of simultaneity.
Neddy Bate
Valued Senior Member
Right. Now ask yourself, in Einstein's TE, what mechanism ensures that both light beams are sent at the same time? There is no beam splitter. For all we know, one lighting strike might have happened a few microseconds before the other one.
Science is the antithesis of religion. To say otherwise is absurd.
this is exactly what i was trying to explain to prof... Both experiment are different. Other main difference is that lightning simultaneous takes place in observer outside reference but in M and M experiment,it takes place in uniform motion reference. So why can't result be opposite?? That is why i created another experiment similar to M and M experiment in context of train which he refuses...
It isn't exactly the same, but the difference's in the experiments are irrelvent. In Einsteins thought experiment the train gains more quickly on the flash of light in front of him. This cannot happen if he measures the speed of each flash in front of him and behind him to be the same speed. So if the flashes in front and behind him are the same speed and the same distance then the observer on the train would measure the flashes to reach him at the same time, as according to the MME.
No, the differences are critical. You can't draw conclusions about one based on the other.
Draw space-time diagrams of each experiment, and you'll see.
Did you even read the rest of my post? The MME is not the only experiment where this has been tested. It is a well known scientific fact. Basing what is actually science on mind experiments is not the way to be scientifically accurate. Have you even heard of the scientific process?
Yes, the facts are very well established. The Michelson Morley Experiment (and the Fizeau experiment, and the Kennedy-Thorndike experiment, and the Ives-Stillwell experiment, and the successors of those experiments) are all consistent with Einstein's train thought experiment.
Draw the spacetime diagrams and see.
If you don't know how, learn. It's not difficult (although you do need to be careful transforming between frames), and well worth it.
The MM experiment is a bit tricky, since you need 2 space dimensions as well as the time dimension.
Draw the spacetime diagrams and see.
If you don't know how, learn. It's not difficult (although you do need to be careful transforming between frames), and well worth it.
The MM experiment is a bit tricky, since you need 2 space dimensions as well as the time dimension.
You mean thought experiment. It's nothing more than a simulation of an actual experiment, when simulators aren't available and the actual experiment is impossible to conduct. There's nothing particularly heinous about a thought experiment as far as the scientific method is concerned, provided the math, the science and the logic are all correct.
Being correct is what science is all about. Everything else is styrofoam.
I think I have just been converted from atheism. I am going to start going to church now, and try to be a buddhist monk or a catholic priest.
Indeed your anti-science posts show a proclivity towards superstition.
That is because I thought science was supposed to be based on experiments, not the holy scientific truth of Einstein the science savior of the world. It is appaulingly obvious that none of you can use your own intellect in order to determine what is scientifically right or wrong. I don't care to get into psuedoscientific theories based on hoky poky thought experiments. Assuming Einstein is right about everything could only make you come up with false notions of science just to fit with what he says. I don't care to listen to more bull about things you can make up to make your savior correct in everything he has ever done. This thread should be sent to the religion forums.
Well obviously if someone thinks you're wrong, they must be basing conclusions on blind faith and not using their intellect. 
It's not that hard layman. Draw a spacetime diagram of the MME. Draw a spacetime diagram of the train thought experiment.
You'll see where the differences are, and how they are consistent with each other.
It's not that hard layman. Draw a spacetime diagram of the MME. Draw a spacetime diagram of the train thought experiment.
You'll see where the differences are, and how they are consistent with each other.
That wouldn't be basing it off of experiment, I will not allow you to talk me into using thought experiments to do actual science!Well obviously if someone thinks you're wrong, they must be basing conclusions on blind faith and not using their intellect.
It's not that hard layman. Draw a spacetime diagram of the MME. Draw a spacetime diagram of the train thought experiment.
You'll see where the differences are, and how they are consistent with each other.
How many zero's did you factor out in order to find that the TE and MME both say the same thing about the arrival time of light traveling the same distance?
difference between einstein's thought experiment and MME:
1) two light beams comes in different direction in einstein's thought experiment while the other two light beams together(both simultaneous)
2) two light beams strike the train simultaneously in stationery frame while MME is in uniform frame.
So inorder to compare einstein's thought experiment and MME,you will have to change einstein's thought experiment similar to it...