Recent content by T0mr

I think I get for the most part what you are saying. All relative motions between IRFs would be the same because we have absolute time and space coordinates in Galilean Relativity. So as you have said each IRF would observe the other with the same speed but moving in the opposite direction...

Andrew Mason, I am with you that the principle of least action feels like a priori assumption. However I do not see how Newton's Second Law, F=ma, can be derived directly from Galilean Relativity. I don't remember seeing that anywhere and I am curious.

You are right. This wording makes more sense. In Aberration the example talks about being in the suns frame of reference. I guess we can consider a distant star like Polaris to be at rest with respect to the sun. While on Earth the observer would be moving. Thanks for taking the time to...

Ahh! So this effect would be called Light-Time Correction not Aberration of Light as I was thinking. It took me a while to make the distinction. But it does seem like these two phenomena are two sides of the same coin. The wikipedia page for Aberation of Light (link by Pervect) says that...

Thanks Nugatory. That is my understanding too. Maybe it is was unnessassary to describe the original problem using a pulse of light. Which to me is something very brief and continuous in space for that short amount of time but still detectable. Einstein uses the term light signal, and I...

Yes. I did have this point wrong. If the light appears to come from A it must have come from A regardless of where the object currently is on its path. I did get confused here. I am having trouble understanding this point. I do not want to try to add the velocity of light and the object or...

Thanks for your reply. It does look like I was wrong in my assumption. I looked at the link, specifically the gif of the observer and the source. If the light pulse appears to come from A (it would actually need to be emitted from a point before A) in my reference frame, then wouldn't that...

An object is an isotropic light emitting source and the object moves very near the speed of light c. I am an observer on a planet without an atmosphere and I see the path of the object as a line that is perpendicular to the normal from the planet's surface where I am standing. Now take a line...

I'm guessing that it has to do with position and velocity being properties that are maintained by the particle. In otherwords, position and velocity are properties that accumulate but acceleration and higher derivatives are not maintained by particles but rather act on the particles. For...

How does the Bohr model violate the uncertainty principle? The Bohr model does correctly predict spectral lines for atomic hydrogen. That is something at least. I get the impression that we feel very confident we have exhausted all mechanical analogies for things like the double slit...

The electron in orbit was given as an example of a possible path. I have read about this argument before. That an classically orbiting electron should emit radiation presumably because it is a charged object and an accelerated charged object (changing direction) will emit electromagnetic...

I never said that entanglement does not violate locality. It certainly appears to be the case. The question is now why can't a deterministic theory be used to explain the instantaneous determination in entangled particle properties. It is not really necessary that we limit our set of laws to...

Thank you Jano for your views, I feel you are right on with your observations. Good observation about the use of classical equations of motion for alpha particles in Rutherford experiment too. My main problem with the QM is that it claims these probabilities are fundamental. Take the hydrogen...

In fairness, the SI convention would work exactly like it does now without defining the base quantities to be mutually independent. So it is in no way critical or damaging to the convention to not assume that m, kg, s, A must be independent of each other. That definition if not accompanied by...

Just because the Ampere was defined to be a base unit does not mean that it cannot be defined in terms of other base units. Even if everyone in the world agrees that the Ampere is a base unit, and that by the definition of the base unit the base unit cannot be written in terms of other base...