On 2/1/2020 10:28 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 11:12:01 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:



    On 2/1/2020 6:45 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


    On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 3:04:16 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:



        On 2/1/2020 12:11 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


        On Saturday, February 1, 2020 at 6:49:40 AM UTC-7, John
        Clark wrote:

            On Sat, Feb 1, 2020 at 7:41 AM Alan Grayson
            <[email protected]> wrote:

                />But what if the CMB _is_ the local clock? /


            I'm not sure what you mean by that, but if all the
            hemispheres of the CMB look about the same to you then
            you'd know you're motion was about the same as the
            average motion of matter in the universe, if the
            hemispheres looked radically different then you'd know
            you were moving at a different speed than most matter in
            the universe. But so what? If you and I want to compare
            our local clocks the only relevant factors are our
            relative speed (Special Relativity) and the relative
            gravitational fields (General Relativity) we're in, how
            the CMB looks to either of us is irrelevant. As Brent
            said "/it's called relativity theory for a reason/".

            Einstein and even Galileo said if you're in a sealed
            room moving at a constant velocity you can't tell if
            you're moving or not, but you don't need to invoke the
            CMB to know that if you look out a window on a moving
            train you can see that there is a lot more stuff outside
            that window than inside the train, and so you could
            determine you're moving relative to most of the stuff
            around you. And if I was in a smaller train than you on
            a parallel track that was moving even faster than you
            compared to most of the stuff around us then the only
            thing you would need to know to figure out the time
            dilation is our relative motion. And both of our local
            clocks will be different not just from each other but
            also different from the clock on the station platform.

                /> How could it manifest time dilation, compared to
                a clock in some moving frame, if its "clock" reading
                doesn't change? AG /


            I don't understand the question. You never see your
            local clock rate change, you observe other people's
            local clock rate change. Everything always seems normal
            to you, it's other people's clocks that behave oddly.

             John K Clark


        When you use the Lorentz transformation to calculate the
        slower clock rate in another frame, what you get is the real
        clock rate in that frame. It's what the other observer
        measures, even though that observer notices nothing
        different. IOW, the calculation of the other observer's
        clock rate is not just an appearance, but what is
        experienced by the other observer. Now suppose we have an
        observer moving wrt the CMB, and the other observer at rest
        wrt the CMB, what I was calling the local clock. The local
        clock rate never changes, but it should according to
        relativity, from the pov of the observer in motion wrt the
        CMB.  AG

        I think it is unfortunate that the idea of time dilation and
        length contraction was ever introduced.  Just compare time
        dilation to ordinary Doppler shift.  We don't make a big deal
        of the oscillator appearing slower when it's going away from
        us.  We didn't invent a "frequency contraction" and puzzle
        over it.  We just see it is just a temporal-geometric effect
        and the oscillator didn't do anything, it didn't slow down or
        speed up.  When someone measures the frequency of an
        oscillator they would never attribute the measured value to
        the oscillator without correcting for Doppler due any
        relative motion that was present.  Relativistic effects
        should be looked at the same way.  Time dilation is not a
        clock slowing down compared to your stationary clock.  It is
        the relativistic Doppler effect due to the two clocks
        measuring time in different directions.  It should not be
        attributed to the clocks, any more than Doppler shift is
        changing an oscillator.  It's just the paths they take thru
        spacetime and each one correctly measures duration along
        their path.  How one looks from a different frame is
        interesting from the standpoint of instruments and
        measurements, but that's so you can correct for the
        spatio-temporal effects of motion and curvature, or you can
        invert the relation and infer the motion and curvature from
        the effects.  But it should be kept clear that the motion and
        curvature are not effecting anything locally, they are only a
        relative effect of the intervening space and motion.

        Brent


    But the doppler effect is apparent only; it's what the observer
    receiving the signal measures or perceives; not what is reality
    for, say, the engineer of the passing train. In contrast, IIUC,
    the LT tells us what the observer in the transformed coordinate
    system actually measures, and experiences. AG

    The observer in which transformed system?  The system of the
    observer who is moving relative to the thing observed?  The
    Doppler shift tells you what that observer actually measures and
    experiences.  Do you think the engineer on the train (assuming
    it's closed) hears  the Doppler shift?  The Lorentz transform
    tells you what is measured in system by someone in a relatively
    moving system.  It's exactly analogous.  Having made an
    observation of a moving system you can use the inverse
    transformation to predict what observed moving with the system
    will see.

    Brent


I don't think so. Not an exact analogy. CMIIAW, but the LT gives the observer using the transformation, what the other frame observer will actually measure; its real value.

Same as when he measures the frequency of a radio wave.  It's a real value he measures. But it's not a property of the transmitter.  The transmitter isn't affected by this measurement.

What the doppler effect gives is NOT what the train engineer measures or hears, which doesn't change while he moves with constant velocity, but what an observer external to the train measures, which depends on whether the train is coming toward him or receding. Motion in space-time gives the actual total elapsed time of, say, the traveling twin, at any point along his path, namely, the proper time. AG

Right.  And the train engineer hears the actual pitch of his whistle at every point along his track.  And people on other trains really do hear it differently.

But the simpler analogy for the twin paradox is the example of the car odometers I gave earlier.

Brent

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8341c1e6-a28b-3e63-a83b-f36184bba966%40verizon.net.

Reply via email to