ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 You're inside your car. You are not moving inside your car unless you have a very long front seat and you're sliding down it toward your steering wheel. What is the force against your butt when you're sitting in your car. It's non-inertial acceleration (gravity) because you're accelerating into your seat without moving. You can feel the force against your butt (assume a rock hard seat). When you step on the gas, your back feels the same force against the upright portion of the seat but again you're not moving within your frame. People all around you, walking, running, driving behind you or passing you or coming from the opposite direction would all measure you moving at different velocities according to their radar guns. Only the cop on the road would measure your speed as what you see on your speedometer. The friend you dropped off is moving at exactly your speed away from you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Well, if I'm reading you right, Ralf, the issue of the effect of acceleration on time dilation has long been settled as both an empirical and theoretical matter (by Einstein, from the outset). I really don't know why any "expert" would claim otherwise. I will concede that, in the past, and even today, some physicists will try to argue that time dilation is "caused by" acceleration, but this is certainly not "mainstream physics." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) You're inside your car. You are not moving inside your car unless you have a very long front seat and you're sliding down it toward your steering wheel. What is the force against your butt when you're sitting in your car. It's non-inertial acceleration (gravity) because you're accelerating into your seat without moving. You can feel the force against your butt (assume a rock hard seat). When you step on the gas, your back feels the same force against the upright portion of the seat but again you're not moving within your frame. People all around you, walking, running, driving behind you or passing you or coming from the opposite direction would all measure you moving at different velocities according to their radar guns. Only the cop on the road would measure your speed as what you see on your speedometer. The friend you dropped off is moving at exactly your speed away from you. Yeah, OK. So? Edited January 22, 2019 by Moronium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 It's not a fallacious claim. Both people are moving at the same speed relative to each other. No one is not moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) So your answer was wrong and so your entire interpretation of relativity is wrong. You're throwing out phrases you read in a wiki article without understanding the meaning or why those phrases are incomplete. Edited January 22, 2019 by ralfcis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 It's not a fallacious claim. Both people are moving at the same speed relative to each other. No one is not moving. I don't follow you. I said that it was fallacious to claim that you can't know if you're moving if you're travelling at a uniform speed. You seem to agree, while purporting to disagree. How can you possibly assert that "No one is not moving," if you can't tell if you're moving? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Some physicists? How do you define acceleration and your answer will not be the same as non-inertial acceleration, I guarantee it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 So your answer was wrong and so your entire interpretation of relativity is wrong. You're throwing out phrases you read in a wiki article without understanding the meaning or why those phrases are incomplete. What answer is wrong? You came here looking for experts. It appears that you don't need one. YOU ARE AN EXPERT!!! You know immediately what the correct "entire interpretation of relativity" is already, it seems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 (edited) Some physicists? How do you define acceleration and your answer will not be the same as non-inertial acceleration, I guarantee it. Heh, in Newtonian terms, which Einstein fully adopted in SR, acceleration is a change in speed and/or direction. You seem to have your own *special* definition of acceleration, so you tell me what it is, eh? Edited January 22, 2019 by Moronium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Your term "non-inertial acceleration" is merely redundant. Acceleration is, by definition, non-inertial. Adding "non-inertial" adds absolutely nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 You're not moving within your frame but you are moving relative to everything outside your frame. You're not moving within your car but you are moving relative to everything outside your car even to your buddy who may see just standing there in your rear view mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 Oh my, I'm going to have to give up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 You're not moving within your frame but you are moving relative to everything outside your frame. You're not moving within your car but you are moving relative to everything outside your car even to your buddy who may see just standing there in your rear view mirror. What is your point? According to the ancient "paradox" disseminated by Zeno, an arrow never moves (relative to itself) when it is flying through the air. Therefore, he claimed, motion is impossible and merely an illusion. Another obvious fallacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 22, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 I'm just interested in saving myself, getting answers to the questions I have about relativity. If I can't convince you of your misinterpretations, the world will go on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 22, 2019 Report Share Posted January 22, 2019 I'm just interested in saving myself, getting answers to the questions I have about relativity. If I can't convince you of your misinterpretations, the world will go on. Suit yourself. It has been my experience that it is virtually impossible to get answers to questions if you yourself are unwilling to answer or entertain any questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralfcis Posted January 23, 2019 Author Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) I must appear just as unwilling to learn to the experts I seek. The problem is usually differences in terminology. I try to explain mine, ask if I understand theirs but I can also understand if I'm talking to an expert or just someone parroting information. Edited January 23, 2019 by ralfcis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronium Posted January 23, 2019 Report Share Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) I must appear just as unwilling to learn to the experts I seek. The problem is usually differences in terminology. I try to explain mine, ask if I understand theirs but I can also understand if I'm talking to an expert or just someone parroting information. Really? At your request, I referred you to a couple of "expert" sources, one being John Baez, a prominent physicist, and one a wiki article basically repeating what Baez said. Your only response was to claim that they didn't know what they were talking about. Edited January 23, 2019 by Moronium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.