Special Relativity Paradoxes

  • #1

Main Question or Discussion Point

The intention here is to discuss paradoxes in Special relativity in mainstream physics, any idea?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
29,736
6,070
Hi koorsh.shahd, welcome to PF.

Please have a look at all of the many, many, many such threads in the relativity sub forum.
 
  • #3
2,257
7
https://www.physicsforums.com/tags.php?tag=paradox [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #4
Thanks, very good, also it happens to be another paradox, which arguments that Lorentz Transformation would be violated for two slow moving observers that observe a fast moving lab system.
Please check:
http://www.scipub.org/fulltext/pi/pi1153-56.pdf [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
5,428
291
Thanks, very good, also it happens to be another paradox, which arguments that Lorentz Transformation would be violated for two slow moving observers that observe a fast moving lab system.
Please check:
http://www.scipub.org/fulltext/pi/pi1153-56.pdf [Broken]
This is from your paper,
... this means O’ and O” frames will measure the energy of created pairs differently which is inconsistent with Special Relativity principal.
I'm sure you are aware that energy and momentum are not Lorentz invariant independently, and have taken this into account.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
5,601
40
From the paper in post #5:

...so far there is no evidence that speed of light would be invariant in
vacuum regardless it is emitted form a stationary or moving body....


I thought that since Einstein's relativity the best evidence so far is that the speed of light IS invarient whether emitted from a stationary or moving body...

Note: That paper would benefit from editing to correct English usage.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
As regards: energy and momentum, imagine, different systems measure their own energy or mass with regards to their invariant mass, but other systems measure their energy increased relatively by ɣ for instance. In a moving system, the energy of the photon is also increased by same factor ɣ measured by a stationary system. So far so good as the energy is consistent with weather measured by the moving observer or stationary observer, so is the created pairs' masses. But considering the fact in above article this gets inconsistent for instance for the slow moving observers.

As regards the other statement that speed of light is invariant in vacuum, so far there is no evidence that can prove the opposite but the speed of light is variant in for instance in different gases with different densities and is measurable, this means that absolute motion is detectable and not relative as Einstein thought.
 
  • #8
As regards: energy and momentum, imagine, different systems measure their own energy or mass with regards to their invariant mass, but other systems measure their energy increased relatively by ɣ for instance. In a moving system, the energy of the photon is also increased by same factor ɣ measured by a stationary system. So far so good as the energy is consistent with weather measured by the moving observer or stationary observer, so is the created pairs' masses. But considering the fact in above article this gets inconsistent for instance for the slow moving observers.

As regards the other statement that speed of light is invariant in vacuum, so far there is no evidence that can prove the opposite but the speed of light is variant in for instance in different gases with different densities and is measurable, this means that absolute motion is detectable and not relative as Einstein thought.
Sorry it was a miss spelling "weather" should be "whether"
 
  • #9
JesseM
Science Advisor
8,496
12
As regards the other statement that speed of light is invariant in vacuum, so far there is no evidence that can prove the opposite but the speed of light is variant in for instance in different gases with different densities and is measurable, this means that absolute motion is detectable and not relative as Einstein thought.
No, this only allows you to detect motion relative to the gas, it doesn't pick out a preferred inertial reference frame. If you have one box of gas A and an identical box of gas B moving at high speed relative to A, and you send light through both boxes, observers at rest relative to each box of gas will get the same answer v1 when they measure the speed of light through their own box, and they will also both get the same answer v2 when they measure the speed of light through the other box.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
1,568
0
The intention here is to discuss paradoxes in Special relativity in mainstream physics, any idea?
Looks like you are trying to promote your paper. From the abstract:

Eventually it is shown that observation by none-inertial frame is Galilean transformation
rather than Lorentz transformation. Conclusion: The outcome of physical experiments observed by inertial and none-inertial observers are completely different as they observe i.e., a fast-moving inertial frame which potentially contradicts Lorentz symmetry.
The above is known to be incorrect. I thought this forum was closed to promoting and debating fringe theories, correct?
 
  • #11
I don't call it promoting a paper, in fact that we are discussing a paradox like any other paradoxes, please explain why incorrect?
 
  • #12
Doc Al
Mentor
44,945
1,216
As starthaus explained, discussion of non-mainstream personal theories is not permitted. Please refer to the Physics Forums Global Guidelines, which are linked at the top of every page under “Rules”, for a full explanation of our rules; note especially the section on "Overly Speculative Posts".
 

Related Threads on Special Relativity Paradoxes

  • Last Post
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
7
Views
6K
Replies
38
Views
5K
Replies
12
Views
8K
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
47
Views
1K
Replies
43
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Top