unknown vector of a closed space

Jul 2019
74
1
another interesting question is, if u argue that Vu = 0 are you not arguing that the closed space is "absolutely" stationery ?

so as a result of SR you are forced to argue there is a Vu and it is not = 0

the flip side if you argue Vu <> 0 the space is "absolutely " moving ?
 

topsquark

Forum Staff
Apr 2008
3,024
638
On the dance floor, baby!
Okay, done with reading 4.

I am still very hazy about two things.
1) Obviously you can measure the relative speed between the closed space containing the strobe and red car. But how do we go from there and get the speed of the closed space? I don't see how your experiment can do that without knowing something about the black car from outside the experiment.

Which brings me to...
2) In order to orient the closed space and accelerate it (before anyone in the closed space is awake, say) to speed Vu we need someone outside the closed space. But all the "outsider" can do is bring the capsule to a speed Vu relative to the outsider. You seem to be saying (again please correct me if I'm wrong) that the outsider can measure the absolute speed of the closed space. I'm very sketchy on this part.

-Dan
 
Jul 2019
74
1
final version, proof read, with additional explanation of centre point of a strobe photon wave front and additional images
 

Attachments

Jul 2019
74
1
Okay, done with reading 4.

I am still very hazy about two things.
1) Obviously you can measure the relative speed between the closed space containing the strobe and red car. But how do we go from there and get the speed of the closed space? I don't see how your experiment can do that without knowing something about the black car from outside the experiment.



-Dan
I assume by "outside the experiment" above you are referring to the red train,The experiment is not being conducted inside the red train.The experiment is being conducted inside the closed space.

The closed space contains the black train and the red train. the objective is to find the velocity of the closed space. the red train can observe any aspect of the black train, as the black train is not external to the closed space.
 
Last edited:
Jul 2019
74
1
Okay, done with reading 4.


Which brings me to...
2) In order to orient the closed space and accelerate it (before anyone in the closed space is awake, say) to speed Vu we need someone outside the closed space. But all the "outsider" can do is bring the capsule to a speed Vu relative to the outsider. You seem to be saying (again please correct me if I'm wrong) that the outsider can measure the absolute speed of the closed space. I'm very sketchy on this part.

-Dan
I just chose numbers out of the air to demonstrate. It could be two unknown velocities, it wouldn't matter. What the external observer sees or measures is irrelevant. Get a monkey to push them it makes no difference.

No matter what the velocity, or not, the ppl inside the close space can find ANY unknown velocity.

That is the purpose of the experiment.
 
Jul 2019
74
1
I measure the Vu of a closed space, call this Vu1

I fall asleep

After I wake up u call me and say I may have given your closed space kinetic energy, I may not have, see if you can find out

I conduct my experiment and get Vu2. I compare Vu2 to Vu1
 
Jul 2019
74
1
I got this response from a physics guru
Firstly ignoring the internal inconsistencies, what does it mean?
Second do I need to do a chapter on my assumption that C is invariant in local space ?

"You are also under the misconception that "the speed of light is invariant". This is only true for one reference frame - which we might guess or assume is the reference frame in which the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation is isotropic as this seems to be a frame in which the average centre of mass of the universe is stationary. If we move with respect to this frame then obviously the light emitted must travel slower in the direction with the motion than in the direction against the motion.

."
 
Last edited:
Jul 2019
74
1
I have assumed on small scales, less than 5km say, the speed of light is isotropic in a vacuum

Is this a reasonable assumption ?

I dont know of any science , or widely accepted science , that refutes this assumption
 
Jun 2016
1,253
598
England
Wrong, Wrong, Wrong!

You are also under the misconception that "the speed of light is invariant". This is only true for one reference frame - which we might guess or assume is the reference frame in which the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation is isotropic as this seems to be a frame in which the average centre of mass of the universe is stationary. If we move with respect to this frame then obviously the light emitted must travel slower in the direction with the motion than in the direction against the motion
I don't know who you got this off, but it is totally contrary to standard Physics opinion.
This forms the entirety of the disagreements with the basic premise of this thread!

All studies and experiments that have looked for changes in the speed of light have failed to find any variation.
the speed of light is most definitely invariant

If it is not, then Einstein's famous theorems are wrong,
and most of the physics of the past century will have to be thrown away.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person