6
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 320:
Line 320: − == Partial Removal == − − I do not know why this page exists. General Relativity does not contradict the conservative ideals of this country. However, instead of refuting all the points by links (this has not worked in the past), I will explain a few of the simpler mistakes on my own. Although this page should be taken down, I realize that you would never allow me to do that. So I recommend that you at least take down these: − − counterexample 6: − Even an infinitesimal mass cannot get to c. Also, a massless particle has to go at c, since if it went slower, it would have no energy and thus not exist, which is a contradiction. Therefore, there is no discontinuity. − − counterexample 7: − Force is defined as dp/dt, or (change in momentum) / (change in time). Say, over a period of time, the force imparts a momentum p to the moving object. Since momentum in the perpendicular direction is initially 0, its final momentum in the perpendicular direction will be p. <math>p=\gamma_y*m*v_y</math>. If the new momentum is small, <math>\gamma_y=0</math> (the gamma factor in the perpendicular direction), <math>v_y</math> = perpendicular velocity and m = rest mass. Thus the force will act on the rest mass. − − counterexample 8: − Actually, the results of an experiment provides good evidence of two predictions of general relativity: frame dragging and basic curvature. This is very recent and exciting news, so I couldn't resist adding one link: − http://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/status1.html#PRL_paper − − counter example 16: − Not sure what this has to do with relativity, and it is ambiguous. (So for now, a change, not deletion would be nice) − − counterexample 24: − The concept of inertia is ill-defined, but it is kind of like resistance to change in velocity. However, there is a specific direction chosen, the direction of motion. Thus, symmetry is broken, so some direction can be preferred. In another, unrelated, example (just to show that symmetry can be broken), imagine a river flowing fairly fast. It is harder to swim 100 feet upstream than 100 feet downstream. Although it's 100 feet either way, one direction is preferred. − − counterexample 25: − Actually, according to the relativistic formula <math>E^2 = m^2*c^4+p^2*c^2</math>, momentum is not strictly dependent on rest mass, but is dependent on energy as well. Since light has energy, it can have momentum under relativity. − − counterexample 31: − Vectors don't have unique inverses under dot or cross multiplication. However, you can multiply all vectors v by <math>1/|v|</math> (|v| is the length of the vector) and get the unit vector in that direction. (Which you can do with time.) − − counterexample 35: − I found this image online, but it shows the idea. Each point (x, t) in the barns frame corresponds to a point in the ladder's frame (x', t'). I will say that it is intuitively weird. The point when the end of the ladder enters the barn is A. The point when the front of the ladder leaves the barn is B. A and B have the same time coordinate in the barn's rest frame, but, in the ladders frame, A has a latter time coordinate than B. − http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/en-labs/9/9a/Polebarn.GIF − − == Partial Removal == − − I do not know why this page exists. General Relativity does not contradict the conservative ideals of this country. However, instead of refuting all the points by links (this has not worked in the past), I will explain a few of the simpler mistakes on my own. Although this page should be taken down, I realize that you would never allow me to do that. So I recommend that you at least take down these: − − counterexample 6: − Even an infinitesimal mass cannot get to c. Also, a massless particle has to go at c, since if it went slower, it would have no energy and thus not exist, which is a contradiction. Therefore, there is no discontinuity. − − counterexample 7: − Force is defined as dp/dt, or (change in momentum) / (change in time). Say, over a period of time, the force imparts a momentum p to the moving object. Since momentum in the perpendicular direction is initially 0, its final momentum in the perpendicular direction will be p. <math>p=\gamma_y*m*v_y</math>. If the new momentum is small, <math>\gamma_y=0</math> (the gamma factor in the perpendicular direction), <math>v_y</math> = perpendicular velocity and m = rest mass. Thus the force will act on the rest mass. − − counterexample 8: − Actually, the results of an experiment provides good evidence of two predictions of general relativity: frame dragging and basic curvature. This is very recent and exciting news, so I couldn't resist adding one link: − http://einstein.stanford.edu/highlights/status1.html#PRL_paper − − counter example 16: − Not sure what this has to do with relativity, and it is ambiguous. (So for now, a change, not deletion would be nice) − − counterexample 24: − The concept of inertia is ill-defined, but it is kind of like resistance to change in velocity. However, there is a specific direction chosen, the direction of motion. Thus, symmetry is broken, so some direction can be preferred. In another, unrelated, example (just to show that symmetry can be broken), imagine a river flowing fairly fast. It is harder to swim 100 feet upstream than 100 feet downstream. Although it's 100 feet either way, one direction is preferred. − − counterexample 25: − Actually, according to the relativistic formula <math>E^2 = m^2*c^4+p^2*c^2</math>, momentum is not strictly dependent on rest mass, but is dependent on energy as well. Since light has energy, it can have momentum under relativity. − − counterexample 31: − Vectors don't have unique inverses under dot or cross multiplication. However, you can multiply all vectors v by <math>1/|v|</math> (|v| is the length of the vector) and get the unit vector in that direction. (Which you can do with time.) − − counterexample 35: − I found this image online, but it shows the idea. Each point (x, t) in the barns frame corresponds to a point in the ladder's frame (x', t'). I will say that it is intuitively weird. The point when the end of the ladder enters the barn is A. The point when the front of the ladder leaves the barn is B. A and B have the same time coordinate in the barn's rest frame, but, in the ladders frame, A has a latter time coordinate than B. − http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/en-labs/9/9a/Polebarn.GIF
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 05:30, May 13, 2011
, 05:30, May 13, 2011no edit summary
#Counterexample 35: Not a counterexample. Citation: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_pole_paradox.htm; http://astro.ucla.edu/~kevinhainline/relativity.html
#Counterexample 35: Not a counterexample. Citation: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_pole_paradox.htm; http://astro.ucla.edu/~kevinhainline/relativity.html
== Partial Removal ==
== Partial Removal ==