> Vorts, > > So, when I first heard about zero point energy years back, I assumed > it was something I had already theorized myself when struggling with > the concepts of relativity (which still bugs me, for the reasons I'm > about to list) as I was mentally using the term Zero Point already. > Imagine my dissapointment... > > > Anyways, I'm a biologist and chemist more than a physicist, so PLEASE, > correct me where I am wrong. As the velocity of an object increases, > its apparent mass increases, and time slows, for that object, yes? > And the time dilation and mass increase is "relative" to the velocity > based upon the observer being a zero point. For 3 objects moving in a > straight line in the same direction, one at .1 c, one at .2 c, one at > .8 c, time dilation will be different for the .8 c object when vied by > the other two objects, yes? because its traveling at .7 c compared to > one, and .6 c compared to the other, correct? > > If that is the case, is there a zero point? is there an intrinsic > velocity that pretty much EVERYTHING in the galaxy/universe shares? > If so, what happens to mass and the flow of time as you approach that > zero point?
The "velocity of the vaccum". Does the vacuum moves? At which speed? And in relation to what? the immobile vacuum? Einstein's SR disregards all those questions as nonsense, or better said, "metaphysics". Speeds are only to be measured between material bodies, and not correlated against any absolute reference, because that absolute reference cannot be measured or determined. Does something that cannot be measured or determined exists? In which sense, or "where", it exists?
