I Can I be taught general and special Relativity on this forum

[Ibix]

And all I want is to tell me what does scientists measure with SR?

Nuclear power plants and weapons cannot be explained without it. Particle accelerators such as CERN likewise (there's a nice video of Bertozzi demonstrating the relativistic energy/velocity relation that you can find on YouTube). For that matter, electromagnetism is a relativistic field theory, so radios and mobile phones. The GPS uses general relativity.

 

[P J Strydom]

Einstein's theory doesn't measure things like a ruler. It uses different equations with Einstein derived to make sure the satellites are running on the same time and are aware of their positions. When orbitting the Earth at high speeds, relativity comes into play. It's not really an equation, but an idea which has been represented mathematically like every other concept in physics.

Now you are confusing me.
Do you say something traveling at 14 000 Km per hour in relation to the Earth needs Special relativity, and not Galilean relativity?
300 000 Km per second, 1 080 000 000 Km per Hour is the speed of light.
this versus 14 000 Km per second?
1.296% of SOL.
this over a measurable distance of 20 000 Km altitude.
Do you know what a negligible adjustment this makes on positioning.
So, now that you know how SR are used in GPS, please explain to me exactly where they are doing an adjustment?
Where between the Satellites and the Earth does Time dilute.

 

[lekh2003]

Now you are confusing me.
Do you say something traveling at 14 000 Km per hour in relation to the Earth needs Special relativity, and not Galilean relativity?
300 000 Km per second, 1 080 000 000 Km per Hour is the speed of light.
this versus 14 000 Km per second?
1.296% of SOL.
this over a measurable distance of 20 000 Km altitude.
Do you know what a negligible adjustment this makes on positioning.
So, now that you know how SR are used in GPS, please explain to me exactly where they are doing an adjustment?
Where between the Satellites and the Earth does Time dilute.

You are now counter confusing me.

 

[P J Strydom]

Nuclear power plants and weapons cannot be explained without it. Particle accelerators such as CERN likewise (there's a nice video of Bertozzi demonstrating the relativistic energy/velocity relation that you can find on YouTube). For that matter, electromagnetism is a relativistic field theory, so radios and mobile phones. The GPS uses general relativity.

So, now you claim that GPS' uses general relativity, and not Special Relativity?

GPS satellites travel at approximately 8,700 mph (14,000 km/h) with respect to Earth. This means time runs 7,200 nanoseconds per day slower for a satellite relative to us on Earth as described by Special Relativity.

http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=77

Lets us continue with exactly what we can measure with SR and GR.
gentlemen, If you don't know, say so.
However, show me on scientists very own Thought Experiment where I am wrong.

 

[weirdoguy]

So, now you claim that GPS' uses general relativity, and not Special Relativity?

Both. Besides, SR is built in GR.

Why do I get the feeling no one can answer me?

Because you are unwilling to learn, and want to stay with your incorrect premises. At least that's what it looks like for me, an external observer. Especially when you write something like this:

Come on gentlemen, don't tell me to go and study the maths.

because studying textbooks that uses maths is the only way to learn and understand physics.

 

[Ibix]

So, now you claim that GPS' uses general relativity, and not Special Relativity?http://www.physics.org/article-questions.asp?id=77

Read the very next paragraph after the one you quoted.

 

[P J Strydom]

Read the very next paragraph after the one you quoted.

Nice of you to investigate the sources I quote.
Do you know how many people would not even have bothered?

The article reads: "GPS satellites travel at approximately 8,700 mph (14,000 km/h) with respect to Earth. This means time runs 7,200 nanoseconds per day slower for a satellite relative to us on Earth as described by Special Relativity.

However, using General Relativity it is possible to calculate that time goes faster for a GPS satellite by 45,900 nanoseconds per day, due to the satellite being 19,000km above the Earth (therefore in weaker gravity). This means overall time runs 38,700 (45,900 – 7,200) nanoseconds faster per day for a GPS satellite relative to us stationary on Earth."

1. As Special relativity describes, time runs slower for the Satellite, than what Time runs on the earth.
2. But according to General Relativity, Time on the Satellite runs Faster.

We will come back to this statement.

 

[Ibix]

Nice of you to investigate the sources I quote.

Do you know how many people would not even have bothered?

The problem is that you didn’t bother to read the source you cited. You need to read carefully if you are going to understand.

1. As Special relativity describes, time runs slower for the Satellite, than what Time runs on the earth.
2. But according to General Relativity, Time on the Satellite runs Faster.

That's not what it's saying. It's saying that you can decompose the time dilation into an effect due to speed relative to a hovering observer and an effect due to height. The effects are opposite. The effect due to speed can be handled using SR (or GR, giving the same result from more complicated maths). The effect due to height needs the full theory of GR to explain.

We will come back to this statement.

No point. You just misunderstood what was written. Please note that, as has been pointed out several times, the sooner you accept that the problems are in your understanding of relativity, not in relativity, the sooner you will start to learn.

Relativity might not be a perfectly accurate model of reality, but it is not inconsistent with itself. Any logical problems you find are in your conception of relativity, not in relativity itself.

 

[phinds]

Do you think our fellow Members realizes that I am playing Devil's Advocate?

No, because you are not playing Devil's Advocate, you are simply spouting over and over the same misunderstandings. A Devil's Advocate tries to use a valid argument, just one that is counter to the one being advocated against. Your arguments are not valid.

I want to see if they understand GR&SR, and will pest them for a while.

By proving over and over that you do not understand SR and GR? That's hardly a test of the members here, it simply a demonstration of your lack of understanding.

 

[jbriggs444]

Do you think our fellow Members realizes that I am playing Devils Advocate?
I want to see if they understand GR&SR, and will pest them for a while.

If you pretend to be a jerk, you are not pretending.

 

[itfitmewelltoo]

No. It is an apparent paradox that arises from an incomplete understanding of relativity. There are others, e.g. the “barn and pole paradox”.

In my experience, in nine out of ten cases, the resolution lies in an understanding of the relativity of simultaneity.

Well, if you're going to make statement like that, explain yourself.

 

[bhobba]

And all I want is to tell me what does scientists measure with SR?

Really? Ever thought of doing a search for experimental evidence for SR?

I just did and up came good old Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity

I will pick one at random:
Time dilation is confirmed in heavy ion storage rings, such as the TSR at the MPIK, by observation of the Doppler effect of lithium, and those experiments are valid in the electron, proton, and photon sector.

You have a direct answer to your direct question. I have also explained the why of both SR and GR, but at present your math is not up to understanding them. I have carefully considered your situation and gave a list of reading material so you can understand it. It is now in your court.

If you insist on this line now you have what you directly asked for, then if this thread is worthwhile continuing will be looked at by the mentors - and yes I am one. Consider this a friendly bit of advice on posting etiquette on this forum.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Ibix]

Well, if you're going to make statement like that, explain yourself.

There are a thousand and one threads on the twin paradox in this forum. Have a look at some of them. It's clearly not an actual paradox in relativity or we wouldn't be able to resolve it.

It is a paradox in a lot of common misunderstandings of relativity, which is why it's often used as a teaching tool - to force you to confront a possible misunderstanding.

 

[bhobba]

Well, if you're going to make statement like that, explain yourself.

Explain what - his experience? In other words you want all the situations that led him to this view listed. That is simply unrealistic - as is very obvious.

This thread is very fast devolving into being valueless.

Please, all those involved can we ensure it gets back on track?

Thanks
Bill

 

[bhobba]

So, now you claim that GPS' uses general relativity, and not Special Relativity?

These things are easily looked up eg:
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

I am pretty sure I explained around here we do not spoon feed - you must do some work yourself.

Its simple to look up the things you are challenging us with.

Why you do that beats me.

Thanks
Bill

 

[russ_watters]

Anyhow, I still want to know what this mysterious measurement of Special Relativity, Time dilation, Length contraction and mass increase is.

Simple, what are they measuring?

Time dilation is the observation (measurement) of different rates of the passage of time and therefore different amounts of elapsed time between clocks.

Simply put; if you have a local repeater for a distant clock, it may not be synchronized with your clock.

 

[russ_watters]

and I read everything about satellites and how Einsteins theories are keeping them on track too.
Yet, what it is keeping track of is not explained.
Do you think that an equation entered into the satellite's computers is working out exactly where the triangulation of 3 satellites pinpoints a true position on earth?
No, in this regard Galileo's relativity is 100% correct.
However, can you tell me what you measure with Einsteins theory?

You really don't seem to be trying very hard and worse, are speculating rather than reading. GPS satellites really, literally do have clocks in them and they really, literally are set up pre-launch to run at different rates than earthbound clocks.

 

[bhobba]

Yet, what it is keeping track of is not explained.

I gave a link.

Here is what it said -
Each satellite carries with it an atomic clock that "ticks" with a nominal accuracy of 1 nanosecond (1 billionth of a second). A GPS receiver in an airplane determines its current position and course by comparing the time signals it receives from the currently visible GPS satellites (usually 6 to 12) and trilaterating on the known positions of each satellite. The precision achieved is remarkable: even a simple hand-held GPS receiver can determine your absolute position on the surface of the Earth to within 5 to 10 meters in only a few seconds. A GPS receiver in a car can give accurate readings of position, speed, and course in real-time!

Its utterly clear what is being measured - the time difference between atomic clocks on the satellites. It uses that to calculate its position - but the effects of both SR and GR must be taken into account.

I will speak plainly - if you insist doing this the tread will be shut down. You must think a bit and stop asking things that are utterly obvious.

You will have to think a LOT harder if you want to understand SR and GR, which is what your question asked - can I learn it from people here. You can, but you will need to do research yourself - we can guide you - but you must do it. Above all you must THINK - which so far you have not shown you really want to do. I am pretty sure you are much more intelligent than this. If you are merely trying to have fun at our expense then you will find it will not last long. You are dealing with people with a very low tolerance to that sort of thing.

Thanks
Bill

 

[russ_watters]

I do thank you for the promotion sir.
Do you think our fellow Members realizes that I am playing Devils Advocate?
I want to see if they understand GR&SR, and will pest them for a while.

Wait, what? I thought you were here to learn - are you saying you understand it already and are just testing us? We don't do that kind of thing here, so if that is really the case we'll need to lock the thread.

 

[Hendrik Boom]

When I was in high school, way back in the 60's, I taught myself special relativity from Einstein's book The Meaning of Relativity. (The .epub version I found a few years ago was unreadable though because the equations were garbled. Get paper or .pdf.)

 

[PeterDonis]

Or do you say what I calculated is incorrect.
If incorrect, show me where?

I already did that, in detail, in post #35. Go read it.

You have also gotten plenty of valuable feedback from others in this thread. Go read it.

Why do I get the feeling no one can answer me?

Because you're not listening to the answers. And that being the case, this thread is closed.