The inertial frame concept in 1905 Relativity
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist", but pseudoscience rules
Next: Physics Turned Upside Down to Keep the Hour Glass of Time Flowing
From: valls on 14 Jul 2010 16:10 On 14 jul, 08:55, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > wrote in messagenews:a0658b7f-6ec2-4a3b-8480-2497737da187(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > >On 13 jul, 20:34, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> wrote in > >> messagenews:8025d47e-eecf-4b5e-9a9a-d18ee9259310(a)j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > >> >Let be n bodies, each one with a different mass and separated among > >> >all them at huge distances (as great as you want). Following 1905 > >> >Relativity, how many different inertial frames we have here, and the > >> >trajectories of what bodies can be described in each one of them? > > >> An infinite number of them. And every body can be described in every > >> frame. > >> Next. > >Let us suppose that two of my n bodies are the Earth and the Sun. > > Fine. Though 1905SR doesn't cover gravity > I put very clear in the title of this thread 1905 Relativity. Dont confuse it with Special Relativity (SR), a denotation introduced by 1916 Einstein to distinguish his previous work in Relativity from his new General Relativity (GR). But SR includes many changes that are of course not present in the original 1905 theory, the one I am addressing. Dont worry too much about that, the majority of persons think that 1905 Relativity (1905R) and Special Relativity are one and the same thing. They seem to enjoy the error, not wanting to correct it, even after reading about the moving system (clock at the equator) describing a gravitational centripetal accelerated circular trajectory (in the 30Jun1905 Einsteins paper). Yes, 1916 Einstein put out gravity from Special Relativity, but nobody can already put it out from 1905 Relativity. > > Consider then the GPS ECI inertial frame. > > The ECI is not inertial .. but close > The today denoted ECI already appears in 1905R at the end of paragraph 4 of the 30Jun1905 Einsteins paper. Our real rotating Earth as the stationary system, including as part of it the moving system (a clock at the equator). After applying to the clock at the equator 1905R formulas, 1905 Einstein predicts that it go more slowly than a similar clock at a pole (referring the effect owed to the difference in velocities, not to the difference in gravitational potentials, only discovered and explained by himself about 10 years later with his GR). The ECI is a complete (not close) centre of mass inertial frame in the 1905R sense (centre of mass inertial frames are a Newtonian concept developed long before 1905 Einstein). > What is it you are calling a 'GPS ECI' ? > GPS is from Global Positioning System. ECI is from Earth Centered Inertial system. > > You can increase the > > distance between the Earth and the Sun as you want. > > In a gedanken ,, yes > You can use the real one is you want. > > Describe the Suns > > trajectory in the ECI. > > Its not an inertial frame .. but in that frame the sun appears to move > around the earth > 1905 Einstein denotes stationary system a one in which Newtonian equations hold good, what corresponds to an inertial frame of our days. You must know that the Sun can never be moving with respect to an Earth at rest following Newtons laws (your every body can be described in every frame is then false). Only the bodies taking into account when determining the centre of mass can be described in the corresponding inertial frame. This is known long before 1905 Einstein. > > Maybe you will need the help of Ptolomy. And > > dont forget that the topic of this thread is about inertial frames. > > And don't forget the ECI is not an inertial frame. > Repeating, the ECI is a complete (not close) centre of mass inertial frame in the 1905R sense. Centre of mass inertial frame is a Newtonian concept developed long before 1905 Einstein. And 1905 Relativity is totally supported by the huge experimental evidence of today GPS. By the way, 1905 Einstein was the first showing how moving clocks can be synchronized with the time showed by rest clocks, already a routine procedure in today GPS. > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
From: oriel36 on 14 Jul 2010 16:26 On Jul 14, 9:10 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > On 14 jul, 08:55, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > > wrote in messagenews:a0658b7f-6ec2-4a3b-8480-2497737da187(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > >On 13 jul, 20:34, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > >> wrote in > > >> messagenews:8025d47e-eecf-4b5e-9a9a-d18ee9259310(a)j4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > > >> >Let be n bodies, each one with a different mass and separated among > > >> >all them at huge distances (as great as you want). Following 1905 > > >> >Relativity, how many different inertial frames we have here, and the > > >> >trajectories of what bodies can be described in each one of them? > > > >> An infinite number of them. And every body can be described in every > > >> frame. > > >> Next. > > >Let us suppose that two of my n bodies are the Earth and the Sun. > > > Fine. Though 1905SR doesn't cover gravity > > I put very clear in the title of this thread 1905 Relativity. Dont > confuse it with Special Relativity (SR), a denotation introduced by > 1916 Einstein to distinguish his previous work in Relativity from his > new General Relativity (GR). But SR includes many changes that are of > course not present in the original 1905 theory, the one I am > addressing. Dont worry too much about that, the majority of persons > think that 1905 Relativity (1905R) and Special Relativity are one and > the same thing. They seem to enjoy the error, not wanting to correct > it, even after reading about the moving system (clock at the equator) You mean this one - "If one of two synchronous clocks at A is moved in a closed curve with constant velocity until it returns to A, the journey lasting t seconds, then by the clock which has remained at rest the travelled clock on its arrival at A will be second slow. Thence we conclude that a balance-clock7 at the equator must go more slowly, by a very small amount, than a precisely similar clock situated at one of the poles under otherwise identical conditions." Albert Einstein Great !,Wonderful!,now does anyone want to venture a maximum equatorial speed so comparisons can be made with clocks at the polar coordinates ?.If the Earth's 360 degree equatorial circumference is 24901 miles then 15 degrees of rotation per hour represents how many miles ?.I will even thrown in a calculator in case you need it - http://www.math.com/students/calculators/source/basic.htm I am dead serious,if you give the correct answer you will see something you ain't seen before.
From: PD on 14 Jul 2010 16:30 On Jul 13, 2:34 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > Let be n bodies, each one with a different mass and separated among > all them at huge distances (as great as you want). Following 1905 > Relativity, how many different inertial frames we have here, and the > trajectories of what bodies can be described in each one of them? > > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) In 1905 relativity, as it also was before this paper AND AFTER this paper, the answer is this: All n bodies would have their trajectories described in any inertial reference frame, and there an infinite number of inertial reference frames for any such system.
From: BURT on 14 Jul 2010 17:26 On Jul 14, 1:30 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 13, 2:34 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > Let be n bodies, each one with a different mass and separated among > > all them at huge distances (as great as you want). Following 1905 > > Relativity, how many different inertial frames we have here, and the > > trajectories of what bodies can be described in each one of them? > > > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) > > In 1905 relativity, as it also was before this paper AND AFTER this > paper, the answer is this: > All n bodies would have their trajectories described in any inertial > reference frame, and there an infinite number of inertial reference > frames for any such system. Infinite coordinate systems is dumb. Mitch Raemsch
From: Inertial on 14 Jul 2010 17:55
wrote in message news:d2d03aaa-33fb-47e7-8436-4148d1627e69(a)b35g2000yqi.googlegroups.com... >Repeating, the ECI is a complete (not �close�) centre of mass inertial WRONG. It is no inertial .. it is in orbit around the sun Please. . try to get the basics right [snip rest of nonsense unread] |