- #1

Vandam

- 126

- 0

I would be thrilled reading your points of view on following:

Special Relativity. (With that I mean: SR, not kind of an ether or LET interpretaion):

In a frame two events are

To make sure you understand what I mean please have a look at the sketch:

154652[/ATTACH]"]

Sketch A.

Top of sketch represents standard 3D space.

The house numbers are bolted to the house. They are part of the house. So are the colors.

Nobody will ever say that the blue house has numer 5, or yellow tower has number 2, etc

Two obsevers look at the landscape around them.

1/ Green observer and red observer can only look through a 2-dimensional telescope.

2/ Because they do not direct their telescope in the same direction (because they are rotated relative to the ground), both observers see a different house. Red observer sees the yellow tower (house number 8). Green observer sees the blue house (house with number 2).

3/ Is the tower (the image of the tower) an 'observer dependent' observation? Yes, because only the red observer sees the yellow tower. In the same context you may say that the house with number 2 is an 'observer dependent' observation: only green observer observes blue house number 2.

4/ Nevertheless we may also say, -we HAVE to say, based on both observers' observations, that both yellow tower and blue house coexist as an 'observer INdependent' construction: part of 3D landscape space that's out there to be observed or not.

If you do not accept that, then you do not believe there are houses in the street if you do not look at them.

5/ For the red observer the yellow tower is in front of him, EVEN BEFORE he looks through his telescope. The fact of looking through his telescope will not change the house, nor the number, nor the color in front of him. As long as the observer does not look through his telescope (wait for the light to reach him) red observer does not know what type of house, color and number are in front of him, but he can find out by looking at it (and he will find out when the light from the tower reaches his telescope).

You might counterargue by saying; "Wait a minute, maybe for red observer the yellow tower is brown and has number 9 instead of number 8, and he (red observer) does not know it until he observes it...". Well, that's impossible because the red observer sees a yellow tower with number 8, not a brown tower with numer 9. That's an experimental fact of the observation exercise as it turned out te be.

What if red sees a football stadium? Well, change tower into a football stadium and start over again.

What if there is out there a football stadium instead of a yellow tower? Well replace tower by football stadium and start over again.

You want the tower brown? Well change the yellow into brown and we start all over again, now with a brown tower.

------------

Sketch B.

Similar scenario is applicable to Special Relativity: spacetime diagram.

Tom is sick; his color changes every second.

Tom turns blue (like a belgian smurf) when the pointers of the clock on his face point toward the mumer 2.

When the pointers of the clock on his face point toward the mumer 8 he is yellow (like a ... ?).

The time figure is a physical real time indication on the clock held in front of Tom's face.

Nobody will say that Tom is blue when the hands of his clock point toward number 4, or 1, whatever. That's impossible.

Green and red observer move relative to each other.

1/ Green and red observer can only look with their 3-dimensional telescopes.

2/ Because the two observer move relative to each other, they see light coming from diferent events.

Red observer sees a Tom with clock indication on 8. Green observer sees Tom when the clock indication is at 2 (iow. 'Tom is not yet 8 seconds old'...). These are real observations. No illusions.

3/ Is Tom with his clock indication 8 an 'observer dependent' event? Yes, because only the red observer sees Tom with clock indication 8. In the same context you may say that Tom with clock at 2 is an 'observer dependent' event : only green observer sees Tom with clock pointers at 2.

4/ Nevertheless we may also say -we HAVE to say, based on both travelers' observations- that Tom with clock indication 2 and Tom with clock indication 8 coexist as an observer INdependent construction, part of 4D Spacetime Block Universe in which 'past, present and future' of Tom exist permanently, observer INdependent.

If you do not accept that, then you do not believe there are Tom events if you do not look at them.

(You might get away with a denial /refutation of an observer INdependent world in a QM context with microscale particles, but that's off topic here).

You might counterargue by saying "Wait a minute, maybe for red observer the yellow tower has number 9 instead of number 8, and he (red observer) does not know it until he observes it...". No, my example shows the facts as they were reported in the observation experiment. In that observation element red observer saw yellow Tom, green observer a blue Tom. Period. And why did they see that and only that? Because the events are 'observer INdependent' out there, part of 4D Spacetime to be observed. For red observer event 'yellow-Tom-with-clock-at-8' has always been simultaneous with event E,

Simply because total 4D spacetime has organised the events that way. Just like the buildings are what they are, and where they are -and no place else- in 3D landscape Space of sketch A.

In a frame two events are

There is no other scenario unless it all gets philosophical or mathematical abstraction/illusion.

Special Relativity. (With that I mean: SR, not kind of an ether or LET interpretaion):

In a frame two events are

*observed*simultaneous because they*are*simultaneous in that frame,*even if not observed*. And those two events are non-simultaneous in another frame because they are non-simultaneous in that frame,*even not observed*.To make sure you understand what I mean please have a look at the sketch:

154652[/ATTACH]"]

Sketch A.

Top of sketch represents standard 3D space.

The house numbers are bolted to the house. They are part of the house. So are the colors.

Nobody will ever say that the blue house has numer 5, or yellow tower has number 2, etc

Two obsevers look at the landscape around them.

1/ Green observer and red observer can only look through a 2-dimensional telescope.

2/ Because they do not direct their telescope in the same direction (because they are rotated relative to the ground), both observers see a different house. Red observer sees the yellow tower (house number 8). Green observer sees the blue house (house with number 2).

3/ Is the tower (the image of the tower) an 'observer dependent' observation? Yes, because only the red observer sees the yellow tower. In the same context you may say that the house with number 2 is an 'observer dependent' observation: only green observer observes blue house number 2.

4/ Nevertheless we may also say, -we HAVE to say, based on both observers' observations, that both yellow tower and blue house coexist as an 'observer INdependent' construction: part of 3D landscape space that's out there to be observed or not.

If you do not accept that, then you do not believe there are houses in the street if you do not look at them.

5/ For the red observer the yellow tower is in front of him, EVEN BEFORE he looks through his telescope. The fact of looking through his telescope will not change the house, nor the number, nor the color in front of him. As long as the observer does not look through his telescope (wait for the light to reach him) red observer does not know what type of house, color and number are in front of him, but he can find out by looking at it (and he will find out when the light from the tower reaches his telescope).

You might counterargue by saying; "Wait a minute, maybe for red observer the yellow tower is brown and has number 9 instead of number 8, and he (red observer) does not know it until he observes it...". Well, that's impossible because the red observer sees a yellow tower with number 8, not a brown tower with numer 9. That's an experimental fact of the observation exercise as it turned out te be.

What if red sees a football stadium? Well, change tower into a football stadium and start over again.

What if there is out there a football stadium instead of a yellow tower? Well replace tower by football stadium and start over again.

You want the tower brown? Well change the yellow into brown and we start all over again, now with a brown tower.

------------

Sketch B.

Similar scenario is applicable to Special Relativity: spacetime diagram.

Tom is sick; his color changes every second.

Tom turns blue (like a belgian smurf) when the pointers of the clock on his face point toward the mumer 2.

When the pointers of the clock on his face point toward the mumer 8 he is yellow (like a ... ?).

The time figure is a physical real time indication on the clock held in front of Tom's face.

Nobody will say that Tom is blue when the hands of his clock point toward number 4, or 1, whatever. That's impossible.

Green and red observer move relative to each other.

1/ Green and red observer can only look with their 3-dimensional telescopes.

2/ Because the two observer move relative to each other, they see light coming from diferent events.

Red observer sees a Tom with clock indication on 8. Green observer sees Tom when the clock indication is at 2 (iow. 'Tom is not yet 8 seconds old'...). These are real observations. No illusions.

3/ Is Tom with his clock indication 8 an 'observer dependent' event? Yes, because only the red observer sees Tom with clock indication 8. In the same context you may say that Tom with clock at 2 is an 'observer dependent' event : only green observer sees Tom with clock pointers at 2.

4/ Nevertheless we may also say -we HAVE to say, based on both travelers' observations- that Tom with clock indication 2 and Tom with clock indication 8 coexist as an observer INdependent construction, part of 4D Spacetime Block Universe in which 'past, present and future' of Tom exist permanently, observer INdependent.

If you do not accept that, then you do not believe there are Tom events if you do not look at them.

(You might get away with a denial /refutation of an observer INdependent world in a QM context with microscale particles, but that's off topic here).

You might counterargue by saying "Wait a minute, maybe for red observer the yellow tower has number 9 instead of number 8, and he (red observer) does not know it until he observes it...". No, my example shows the facts as they were reported in the observation experiment. In that observation element red observer saw yellow Tom, green observer a blue Tom. Period. And why did they see that and only that? Because the events are 'observer INdependent' out there, part of 4D Spacetime to be observed. For red observer event 'yellow-Tom-with-clock-at-8' has always been simultaneous with event E,

*even if he didn't make an observation during his traveling*. For red observer event 'Blue-Tom-with-clock-at-2' has always been__non__simultaneous with event E.*even if he didn't make an observation during his traveling*. Etc.Simply because total 4D spacetime has organised the events that way. Just like the buildings are what they are, and where they are -and no place else- in 3D landscape Space of sketch A.

In a frame two events are

*observed*simultaneous because they are really simultaneous in that frame,*even if not observed*. And those two events are non-simultaneous in another frame because they are really non-simultaneous in that frame,*even not observed*.There is no other scenario unless it all gets philosophical or mathematical abstraction/illusion.