Mountain Man's UseNet ArchiveTesting the Theory | ||
---|---|---|
Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia in the Southern Spring of 1996 | ||
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 03:33:28 GMT
From: bjon@ix.netcom.com (Brian Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: What is the Theory of Relativity?
This means that SRT must be testable. There must exist at least on way to test this theory. The word "exist" denotes "current existence," for those who may miss this critical distinction. All past and prior tests are irrelevant. This includes the Michelson-Morely experiment, the Kennedy-Thorndike experiment, experiments done in any particle accelerator, and any and all other previously performed experiments.
In other words, SRT is not a scientific theory unless it is currently testable by an entirely new experiment never before performed. SRT cannot "rest on its laurels," so to speak.
To put this in layman's terms: It must be possible to show on paper a procedure that has the potential, given all that we now know, to contradict SRT. Otherwise, this theory is not a scientific (or proper) theory.
The sole purpose of this little paper is to present just such a test of SRT. (The letters KISS-TPP refer to two simple things. TPP refers to the fact that this test involves a spinning disk or wheel, recalling the song Spinning Wheel with its phrase Ride a painted pony, etc. TPP = The Painted Pony. KISS stands for Keep It Simple, Stupid, referring to the fact that this is a highly simplified version of TPP.)
Specific Answer: Since it is well-known that SRT calls for light’s unidirectional speed to always be “c” for any and all inertial observers, any experiment having the potential to yield a value other than “c” would constitute a proper SRT test.
For the layman: If you can show _on paper_ a way that light’s one-way speed could turn out to be other than c, you will have designed an acceptable SRT test.
"The relations [of the relativistic Lorentz tranformation’s primed and umprimed coordinates] must be so chosen that [light's one-way speed is c for all inertial observers].
And after Einstein had presented the equations of the relativistic Lorentz transformations, following the above dictate, he wrote:
[ibid., pp. 33-34] .... "A light-signal is sent along [reference-body K’s] positive x-axis, and this light-stimulus advances in accordance with the equation x=ct, ie with the velocity c. [Applying the relativistic Lorentz transformation equations yields the same one-way light speed for the second observer K’]. We thus see that the velocity of [light] relative to the reference-body K’ is also equal to c. Of course this is no surprising, since the equations of the [einsteinian] Lorentz transformation were derived conformably to this point of view.
For the layman: In special relativity, light’s speed is always c for all observers simply because Einstein sets all clocks to record this speed no matter how fast the observer may be moving in the absolute sense.
Especially note Einstein’s phrase: ...derived conformably to this point of view. This means that his famous transformation equations (ie. those relating one SRT observer to another as to their observations) were designed to comply with Einstein’s rule that light’s one-way speed must be found to be c by all observers.
For the layman: To make clocks comply with his theory of relativity, Einstein manually sets all clocks to cause them to read the same time for any one-way light ray trip. Remember, each clock reads a different time even for a single observer, and no other observer’s clocks will agree with any of these, except by sheer coincidence. This is why, in SRT, one observer may see two events as being simultaneous, whereas another will see the same two events as occurring at different times. It’s all due to Einstein’s way of setting clocks. He sets them to get c, as we have found, and this makes them all read differently.
We therefore see that SRT’s c for all is not really a natural law, not a law of physics. By his own admission (given above), Einstein actually manipulates his clocks to force the value c in the case of light’s unidirectional speed relative to the inertial observer.
Since this is not a law, or not an experimental result at all, it is not binding.
Since nature has not (contrary to that which has been written in more than one relativity book) dictated the value c for the one-way lightspeed, this leaves the door wide open for other values to be considered, at least in principle or theoretically.
On paper, such classical clocks can be shown as follows: Locate clock A and clock B at the origin and to the right of the origin on the observer’s x-axis, or the axis parallel to the observer’s (unknown) absolute direction of motion through space. Place the same time reading on the faces of both clocks. The clocks are now truly or absolutely synchronized. (In SRT of course, the clocks would have different readings).
It is well-known that all classical clocks yield the commonsense value c + v for light’s one-way speed (for an oncoming, x-axis light ray). In physics terms, all relative velocities are directly additive under the Galilean transformation. We can now state an important conclusion:
Given: A closed lab on board a standard inertial reference frame. Place a pair of clocks on the floor of this lab, a convenient distance apart. For simplicity, we assume that the clocks lie on the observer’s x-axis (his true line of motion through space). A simple, white, rotatable disk is placed on the floor between the two clocks, with the disk’s perimeter just touching the clocks. We assume there to be very little friction when the disk is rotated. A thin, red line is painted on this disk, running from clock to clock. At the ends of this red line are two point-sized (or nearly point-sized) clock-starting prongs. These prongs will not activate (start) the clocks until after the prongs have touched the clocks 30 times. (The reason for this safety factor shall soon become clear.)
The disk is pushed to start it rotating about its center. After, say, 15 or 20 full rotations, we assume no further effects of the initial accelerating force. With the disk slowly (no need for speed) rotating, we wait for the prongs to go into active mode. At this point, the two prongs should start the two clocks at precisely the same time, thereby absolutely or truly or classically synchronizing them.
As we mentioned above, the are the two relevant outcomes:
[2]Mr. Einstein’s special relativity theory calls for this any and all measurement of light’s one-way speed to always yield the value c.
Brian Jones ..... bjon@ix.netcom.com
Gerald Lebau .... glird@gnn.com
Mountain Man's UseNet ArchiveTesting the Theory | ||
---|---|---|
Web Publication by Mountain Man Graphics, Australia in the Southern Spring of 1996 | ||