Common Errors in Anti-SR Theory: Syncing Distant Events

In summary, the most common error an anti-SR theory has is people synchronizing two events separated by distance for multiple frames.
  • #1
Alkatran
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
959
0
What would you say is the most common error an anti-SR theory has? I find that it is almost ALWAYS someone synchronizing two events separated by distance for multiple frames. Examples would be the barn pole paradox, the train-through-tunnel paradox (front goes in: bomb armed, backs goes in: armed bomb explodes, front goes out: bomb is disarmed, what happens?), etc etc...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I would agree: the relativity of simultaneity.

Another error is the misunderstanding of the variables in the Lorentz Transformation, especially when incorrectly applied to the supposed paradox. Formulating things geometrically often reveals the error in supposed paradox.
 
  • #3
Its a loaded question - it presumes that SR is correct and that anyone who does not agree or who raises issues is by definition "wrong" or a crank. There are several well thought out alternative theories that are equally confirmed by all known experiments to date. Selleri transforms for example work just as well as the lorentz transforms in that they predict the same time dilation and length contraction, but they are not derived from the postulate of one-way isotrophy.
 
  • #4
I'd say its a more basic problem of acceptance. People just don't want to accept that time isn't absolute. All other errors stem from an attempt to reconcile observation with an absolute time.
 
  • #5
I agree; it's a gut-reaction that says there must be one preferred frame of refference.
 
  • #6
I didnt know there was an anti-SR theory. lol.
 
  • #7
Perhaps the author is referring to those criticisms of SR that are levied against the impossibility of the second postulate or some aspect of Einstein's flawed logic..as opposed to alternative explanations of the experimental results that are consistent with the Lorentz transforms.
 
  • #8
Nenad said:
I didnt know there was an anti-SR theory. lol.
ram1024, GeistKessel, urtalkingstupid, ...
 
  • #9
I think there are two types of people who argue against SR:

1) Those who claim that SR leads to physically incompatible situations (paradoxes), ie that SR is not a self-consistent model.

The most common misunderstanding in this group seems to be to take the time dilation and length contraction equations, and treat them as a complete formulation of SR. These are the posters who never appear to acknowledge the existence of the Lorentz transform.

2) Those who claim that the predictions of SR do not match experimental evidence.

I don't know much in this area - I always seem to get caught up with the first type!


Oh - perhaps there is also be a third group:
Those who accept the consistency and experimental validity of SR, but contend that a different model is better. I think this includes Lorentzian relativity, and other ether theories. I don't know much about them either - most of the ether theorists are in one of the first two groups.
 
  • #10
yep - there are several catagories of disbelievers - and there are two main catagories of relativistic defenders that have different interpretations of what is real and what is simply an observational measurment - and these two groups usually divide on the explanation of the twin and triplet thought experiments as to whether the time loss is explained by the turn around acceleration, or alternatively (as well known author Robert Resnick argues) that the path integral is determinative of the time dilation effect - acceleration is of no consequence.

There was another author that pointed out in 1905 that the two postulates of SR might be in conflict - this guy was obviously a crackpot because by 1920 he was fully convinced that an ether was essential. Before he died he even implied that SR was a wrong track and that it would not enjoy lasting significance. What crust...what a dumb guy. I forgot his name - Albert something or other - maybe one of you can help me out.
 
  • #11
Alkatran said:
ram1024, GeistKessel, urtalkingstupid, ...
I think Nenad was objecting to the label "theory" being applied there. They are more like ignorant, idle daydreams.

Pete, there is a 4th group - those who say that SR matches experimental evidence, but the universe is somehow deceiving us. Ie, C isn't constant, it only looks constant.

There is also a guy who has argued on several sites (including here) that atomic clocks experience a clock rate effect similar to pendulum clocks (pendulum clocks slow down in decreased gravity), so it isn't really time itself that's changing. He's also alternately argued that while all physical processes are affected by it, its not really a change in the rate of the passage of time itself - just individual changes in individual physical processes.
 
Last edited:

1. What is Anti-SR Theory and how does it relate to Common Errors in Syncing Distant Events?

Anti-SR Theory, also known as Anti-Special Relativity Theory, is a scientific theory that challenges the principles of special relativity proposed by Albert Einstein. It suggests that the speed of light is not constant and that time and space are not relative. This theory is often used to explain the concept of syncing distant events, which is the process of coordinating the timing of events that occur at different locations in space. Common errors in syncing distant events refer to the mistakes made in attempting to synchronize clocks or events that are far apart.

2. What are some of the most common errors in Anti-SR Theory when it comes to syncing distant events?

Some of the most common errors include not accounting for the curvature of space-time, not considering the effects of gravity, and not taking into account the relative motion of the observers. These errors can lead to discrepancies in the synchronization of distant events and can invalidate the results of experiments or observations.

3. How do these errors affect our understanding of time and space?

These errors can greatly impact our understanding of time and space. If we do not account for the curvature of space-time or the effects of gravity, we may incorrectly measure or perceive time and distance. This can lead to false conclusions and misunderstandings about the fundamental principles of the universe.

4. How can scientists avoid these common errors in Anti-SR Theory when syncing distant events?

To avoid these errors, scientists should carefully consider all the variables that may affect the synchronization of distant events, such as gravity, relative motion, and the curvature of space-time. They should also use precise and accurate measurement techniques and constantly review and analyze their data to ensure the validity of their results.

5. Are there any potential implications of these common errors on future research and scientific advancements?

Yes, there could be significant implications on future research and scientific advancements. If these errors are not addressed and corrected, they could lead to false conclusions and hinder our understanding of the universe. It is important for scientists to continually review and improve upon their methods to ensure accurate results and further advancements in our knowledge and understanding of the world around us.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
70
Views
8K
  • Other Physics Topics
Replies
0
Views
674
  • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
8K
Replies
24
Views
23K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
11K
Back
Top