- #1
DewaldS
- 22
- 0
The relative motion and the relative time of any inertial system to another one is in literature available (to me) subject to multiplication by a factor lambda = (1-v^2/c^2)^-1/2. It is found in the Lorentz transformation as well as STR. Is it possible to arrive at the same result and formulae without the 2nd postulate of STR? I note that some physicists do not go with the 2nd postulate of STR, (Lorentz contraction for Michelson Morley device arm) but use the Lorentz transformation (with speed of light as a max inside these formulae) in their arguments - how can this make sense?
Where can I find a derivation of the Lorentz transformation with the arguments that are put forward?
Is the progression of physics not hampered by the 'maximum possible speed of information transmission' being the speed of light? I mean - if I do not see an object traveling at c via it's light reflection -it does not mean that it is not there. Or if I go faster than the speed of light - even directly into the light - why am I going 'back into time'? (Even in relation to the light wave or 'light particle's' clock)? I do not get this - please help!
Where can I find a derivation of the Lorentz transformation with the arguments that are put forward?
Is the progression of physics not hampered by the 'maximum possible speed of information transmission' being the speed of light? I mean - if I do not see an object traveling at c via it's light reflection -it does not mean that it is not there. Or if I go faster than the speed of light - even directly into the light - why am I going 'back into time'? (Even in relation to the light wave or 'light particle's' clock)? I do not get this - please help!