Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Problem Of Length Contraction At Cern Due To Special Theory Of Relativity.

www.maheshkhati.com

  • Please log in to reply
129 replies to this topic

#18 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 06:48 AM

And you completely misunderstood what I said the both of you the points within the objects themselves contract not the empty energy less space between them. velocity is not a property of space but matter besides when you define Dark Energy and Gravity but that Is different. I should say Momentum not velocity to be more accurate is not a property of space but matter.

 

 

Shrinking-Card-Box-alt.jpg

 

 

Srlc1.png

 

See how the length of the objects is different but not that actual space unlike gravity which does actually warp space.

 

image100.gif


Edited by Vmedvil, 19 December 2017 - 07:07 AM.


#19 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 05:43 PM

Why hasn't anyone looked up the simple fact that GW waves are Quadrupole and as such two sides contract while the other two expand?

standard GR intro textbooks has the correct formulas which I haven't seen anyone post yet.

Also it is the proper distance and not the coordinate distance that changes.

[math]\Delta L=(1+\frac{1}{2}h^{tt}_xx(x=0))\epsilon[/math]

 

equation 9.24 Schultz "A First course in General Relativity (second edition page 224)

[math]\epsilon[/math] is the initial separation.

 

You need to use the transverse traceless guage with

this article gives it a little different but it amounts to the same

 

http://webs.um.es/bu..._lecture_KG.pdf

start with the three dimensional wave equation under the four momentum not under SR....the particles will remain at rest under SR thats an artifact of the metric hence not valid under GR.


Edited by Shustaire, 19 December 2017 - 06:23 PM.


#20 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 06:37 PM

Why hasn't anyone looked up the simple fact that GW waves are Quadrupole and as such two sides contract while the other two expand?

standard GR intro textbooks has the correct formulas which I haven't seen anyone post yet.

Also it is the proper distance and not the coordinate distance that changes.

[math]\Delta L=(1+\frac{1}{2}h^{tt}_xx(x=0))\epsilon[/math]

 

equation 9.24 Schultz "A First course in General Relativity (second edition page 224)

[math]\epsilon[/math] is the initial separation.

 

You need to use the transverse traceless guage with

this article gives it a little different but it amounts to the same

 

http://webs.um.es/bu..._lecture_KG.pdf

start with the three dimensional wave equation under the four momentum not under SR....the particles will remain at rest under SR thats an artifact of the metric hence not valid under GR.

Yes, but you cannot do that if you want it to be Accurate to real universe those equations are trash and have error. Anytime you see ≈ that means does not perfectly explain and it is for Flat space which makes it trash.


Edited by Vmedvil, 19 December 2017 - 06:55 PM.


#21 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 06:53 PM

Of course its accurate to the real universe the coordinate distance is the worldline of the photon laser paths.

Hence how LIGO detected the GW waves via the changes to the time components of the lasers from A to B in each arm.

Yeesh

#22 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 06:56 PM

Of course its accurate to the real universe the coordinate distance is the worldline of the photon laser paths.

Hence how LIGO detected the GW waves via the changes to the time components of the lasers from A to B in each arm.

Yeesh

 

No, it isn't do you see all in equivalents in it's derivation  ≈ and doesn't take in account quantum effects or particle states or even curvature in Minkowski space. Trash!


Edited by Vmedvil, 19 December 2017 - 07:01 PM.


#23 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:30 PM

You don't even understand how tensors work in QM, QFT nor GR. Who are you to judge formulas devekoped by Ph.Ds in these subjects.

Your nothing but a crackpot pretending to understand physics.

Tell me have you figured out integrals yet in terms of the functionals that make up a tensor?

Ie vectors caĺculus.

Edited by Shustaire, 19 December 2017 - 07:31 PM.


#24 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:30 PM

You don't even understand how tensors work in QM, QFT nor GR. Who are you to judge formulas devekoped by Ph.Ds in these subjects.

Your nothing but a crackpot pretending to understand physics

Lol, ya sure I am.



#25 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:32 PM

Great then you assume to be smarter than those PH.Ds correct?

#26 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:32 PM

Those are professional peer reviewed formulas Dolt.

#27 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:33 PM

They are the very formulas used by LIGO to drsign the detector itself.

#28 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:35 PM

How about this they may have had lower standards than me but I wouldn't have passed it. Do you see what one dot that is a outlier, failure to be accurate FAIL

Is It accurate to within a Planck Length FAIL!

 

Does it use anything that says Newtonian FAIL!


Edited by Vmedvil, 19 December 2017 - 07:39 PM.


#29 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:36 PM

Answer this Mr expert. What is the principle invariant quantity other than c under GR.

#30 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:40 PM

Answer this Mr expert. What is the principle invariant quantity other than c under GR.

Tuv



#31 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:44 PM

wrong the worldline Tensors are not individual quantities they are functionals.

Edited by Shustaire, 19 December 2017 - 07:45 PM.


#32 Vmedvil

Vmedvil

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:45 PM

wrong the worldline

see, that is SR do you know the difference?

 

and oh ya it is not invariant.

 

 

cone.jpg

 

 

terminology.gif

 

 

U34I5.png


Edited by Vmedvil, 19 December 2017 - 07:49 PM.


#33 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:47 PM

Of course I do There is a switch due to GR all frames are inertial but a tensor isnt a quantity idiot.

#34 Shustaire

Shustaire

    Questioning

  • Members
  • 128 posts

Posted 19 December 2017 - 07:47 PM

Quantity is a single value dolt go ahead google Quantity definition math. The worldline counts as the ds^2 line element returns a scalar quantity.

The energy momentum tensor doesnt.

Did you even read that pdf I posted to you are was that too advanced for you?

Edited by Shustaire, 19 December 2017 - 07:52 PM.