HELP!
I’m studying Einstein’s special relativity and his thought-experiments. In three weeks I haven’t been able to devise any testable hypotheses. I’m about to conclude that it’s a religion-like belief.
Can anyone help, or was A E just fooling around?
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
14 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.@David_Cooper Thanks for your posts.
I’m ninety and when I started college Sigmund Freud was revered. He became a mere mortal and Albert Einstein is on his way to becoming another.
yvilletom
Level 8
Apr 23, 2021
0
@David_Cooper “...[ Einstein will ] remain up there with the greats of physics, but not for STR and GTR.”
Nor for his refusal to use the scientific method.
I first heard of artificial intelligence in the 1960s, when during the Cold War with the USSR people wanted fast language translation. It has improved greatly.
@David_Cooper “...what else in physics (and in other sciences, and mathematics itself) may also contain glaring errors...?
Donald Scott, retired professor of electrical engineering, wrote “... all the experiences I have had with representatives from those areas of science that deal with non-testable past and distant realms [ archaeology, anthropology, or geology ] have resulted in my being told with supreme authority that everything those experts were saying was accurate, correct, and precisely known. And they brook no suggestions of alternative hypotheses.”
I am reading the list of posts presented here and have a thought. Apparently there is a misunderstanding on what the theories are and how they apply to reality. You must have some source for your arguments, and I would think that these authors have no idea what they are talking about. Remember Einstein has had just over one-hundred years of people looking at his work and almost all of it has been proven to be correct. The ideas you are using, like the speed of light changing can be said to be correct. If the speed of light moving through a medium is measured one will find out that it is not moving at the same speed it would had the speed been measured in a vacuum. The experiments you mention have all proven that Einstein was correct, with amazing accuracy. I do not believe you are being told the whole story here and that perhaps someone is feeding you a line of crap as your arguments show an incorrect understanding of the information. I tell you this with proof, I have been looking for a method to prove one of Einsteins laws incorrect, it is impossible with the information Science has at this time.I want to be able to show that one can attain the speed of light or faster, so that ships can traverse space like in Star-Trek. So far there is one method to do this but it takes negative energy, which at this time does not exist nor can it be made. If one could encase oneself in a space bubble then the bubble of space could be made to traverse space as fast as one would want. This is like placing oneself in a column of water and then moving the column of water through the ocean, with no force operating outside the original water column. There is no way to do this. If you can figure it out do not post here post in a scientific journal and you will receive a Nobel.
Another point is that if you are going to do Math with the Theory of Relativity you have to use the proper Math, you are not and I see no mention of it. Relativistic Mechanics is its own branch of Mathematics and Physics. It does not operate in the same manner as regular Math.
dalefvictor
Level 8
Apr 23, 2021
0
Why would you expect to be able to devise an experiment to test a theory that you almost certainly don't understand? It seems the height of arrogance to me.
Gareth
Level 7
Apr 22, 2021
1
Read the post again and think about it for a while. Do you know how learning works?
You nailed it!! Apparently he's fancies himself a self-styled guru of some sort.
The special theory of relativity helps us understand the relations of object in the macro sense. Quantum Mechanics helps us understand things in the quantum realm.
Both are fundamental yet disagree consistently. However, Einstein's speed limit as I like to call it tells us that nothing can move faster than light.
As one increases velocity they acquire mass. To continue to increase velocity they must acquire even more mass (fuel) at a point just shy of the speed of light one cannot shed enough mass to pass the speed of a photon.
No matter what the object is (outside the quantum realm) it cannot pass that speed limit without something theoretical such as a wormhole.
I advise reading on of Neil Tyson's books that delve into the subject. His insight is invaluable on understanding the concept better
redhog
Level 7
Apr 21, 2021
0
I need more info on your credentials than your bio reveals.
I have read of the relativity vs. QM issue but have not studied it. I doubt the existence of wormholes. The first paragraph of Tyson’s Astrophysics for People in a Hurry makes an unsupportable claim.
Do a search on “what are the most popular forms of fiction”. Ditto for non-fiction. Many people confuse scifi and science.
Look at how GPS works. It uses both special and general relativity.
If you understand GPS, then you will have a better time coming up with testable hyptheses of your own.
Myah
Level 6
Apr 21, 2021
1
Does GPS use relativity, or does it use mathematics that approximates relativity?
I ask that because the mathematician LeMaitre metaphorically stole cosmology from physicists. We physicists want it back but we don’t have billions of taxpayers’ dollars/euros.
AE’s thought-experiments gave him the freedom to go where empiricists do not go.
The atomic bomb, the hydrogen bomb, gravitational lensing, resolution of the Mercurial orbit discrepancy, red shifts, blue shifts .... nope, I can't think of any verifiable evidence. You are right, it must be a religion <sarc>
Normanbites
Level 7
Apr 21, 2021
0
According to the memoir by Gen. Leslie Groves, who managed the bomb project, Einstein’s signing the letter to FDR was the only part he had in the project.
@yvilletom Einstein developed his theory of relativity from 1905-1917. Work on the Manhattan project was later based on that work in the 1940's.
And so your point is WHAT?? exactly???
Sarcasm requires anger. Less its anger, what remains of your OP?
@yvilletom You are right, remove the "anger from my post" and all you have is evidence and facts.
So, about the "attitude", sorry, not sorry.
@normanbites what role did special relativity play in making of the bomb? People had to figure out radioactive decay and criticality. Then the rest was mostly engineering. Could you please explain the role of relativistic effects in an atomic bomb? In uranium, the outer shell electrons are under relativistic conditions, but not the nucleus
@Spongebob The theory of relativity was fundamentally based on his research and discoveries regarding the photovoltaic effect. ... In the vein of "if this happens ... then this is how it happens" this deductive reasoning lead to both the theory of relativity and the familiar E-mc^2 identity. So it may be more accurate to say the atom bomb and the theory of relativity are based on the same foundations, rather than the atom bomb is based on the theory of relativity.
Beyond that, Gravitational lensing, red shifts, blue shifts, and resolution of the Mecurial orbit discrepancy have been observed and are indeed direct tests of the theory of relativity.
Now to be fair, I owe neither you nor yvilletom an education on the matter. If you want to delve into this further, please do it on your own time.
@Normanbites E =mc2 comes from the photoelectric effect, which Einstein did explain. You are correct that understanding photoelectric effect played a major role in the birth of quantum mechanics which in turn was needed for the bomb. I still don't see the connection. It is okay, I will go and learn more. It doesn't look like you want to teach 
@Spongebob Thanks! I appreciate that. If you were willing to pay me more for the lesson material, my attitude could be different. 
His theories led to the creation of the atomic bomb. Obviously they work.
Writerman13
Level 5
Apr 21, 2021
1
According to the memoir by Gen. Leslie Groves, who managed the bomb project, Einstein’s signing the letter to FDR was the only part he had in the project.
@yvilletom Einstein developed his theory of relativity from 1905-1917. Work on the Manhattan project was later based on that work in the 1940's.
And so your point is WHAT?? exactly???
The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity.
These days much the same experiment is in constant operation aboard GPS satellites
Another possibility is to measure the doppler shift in the spectra of the planets as our relative velocities change throughout the year.
MattHardy
Level 7
Apr 21, 2021
4
Preliminary: NASA is so deeply invested in the standard model that its credibility is suspect.
@yvilletom Tempting as it is to go down that rabbit hole with you, the main reason it's silly is because NASA has nothing to do with any of the suggestions I made for you to test relativity. The Hafele–Keating experiment wasn't funded by NASA, nor do you need NASA funding to replicate it. GPS wasn't funded by NASA nor do any of the other positioning systems up and you wouldn't need NASA approval to perform the same experiment. Also you don't need NASA approval to measure the spectra of the planets at different times of the year. What's silly is you mentioning NASA in relation to my answers to you question. I treated your question as a genuine inquiry. Was I mistaken to do so?
now im confused.
doesnt the 1964 nobel prize winning penzias -wilson establishment of the 3 degree universal cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), provide the floor for all the hard data on which the brand new science of a testable cosmology is based? and from that, with the data from the hubble telescope and a flock of other new computer enhansed other telescopes (like red shift increasing rates of galactic acceleration as distance increases, and spacial "bubble" patterning on a scale never previously considered? ) is not all of this new science of cosmology, in its totallity, a massive testable confirmation of einstein's relativity thought experiment?
holdenc98
Level 7
Apr 21, 2021
0
Preliminary: NASA is so deeply invested in the standard model that its credibility is suspect.
There's a couple of other options. You might not be smart enough to construct a testable hypotheses and/or no one cares enough if you understand to help. Why does your inability to do something reflect on Einstein at all?
redbai
Level 8
Apr 21, 2021
3
perhaps true. but so cold. if we can't be warm with each other, whats the point of our puny existance?.... HOLDENN C 'S THOUGHT EXPERIMENT ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF HUMAN LIFE.
As always you are dead wrong and completely full of shit.
Mofo1953
Level 9
Apr 21, 2021
2
Aw, you surrendered without having tried.
Having added only petulance, you surrendered again.
Best google tests of special relativity or otherwise present your mathematical magnum opus as refutation.
waitingforgodo
Level 8
Apr 21, 2021
0
Special Relativity stems, to a remarkable extent, from the Michelson/Morley experiment of 1887 (Albert A Michelson and Edward W Morley).
The Michelson/Morley experiment discovered that the speed of light in a vacuum COMPARED TO THE OBSERVER is always precisely the same, regardless of the motion of the observer.
In other words if you measure the speed at which light approaches you, you will find it's approaching you at 300,000,000 meters per second. Even if you are heading in the OTHER DIRECTION at 200,000,000 meters per second, the light will STILL be overtaking you travelling at 300,000,000 meters per second compared to you. It doesn't matter how you are moving, light always passes you at the same speed relative to you.
Now how you get from this to objects physically shortenning as they approach the speed of light, how time itself slows down as you approach the speed of light, how the speed of light itself cannot be surpassed, how objects approaching the speed of light increase in mass, and so on is intricate and complex (and shows why Einstein was such a genious) - but those conclusions are a DIRECT RESULT of the truth that the Michelson/Morley experiment demonstrated.
The Michelson/Morley experiment showed a truth, and Einstein then took that truth and worked out the logical consequenses of it.
A 'religion like' belief?
It is almost impossible to IMAGINE anything LESS like a religious belief. Special relativity is TOTALLY based on logical deduction from observable, experimental fact.
ToakReon
Level 8
Apr 21, 2021
7
the reason the speed of light is a constant no matter what the speed of the observer is because that constant is applied by observation and doesn't exist in reality.
When a potential-changing event happens the potential is changed instantaneously in reality and then a cause/effect chain results that is subject to the physical parameters of our "reality".
Think of it as an explosion happening on a distant island. You don't see it, hear it, or feel it until those waves of causation hit you ... and they all lag the actual potential-change which happened at the moment of the event. This is because the substratum upon which that potential change is "annotated" is the field of awareness and it is infinite and timeless. Space? Not affected by it because everything is right there. Time? Not affected by it because everything is NOW. But as those bits of info reach our human brain our minds add in the speed of light as the "reality adjuster".
This is also why quantum entanglement happens no matter the distance apart of the particles. The "field" that collapses the waveform (double slit) is infinite.
Thanks, John. A search on “what did the Michelson/Morley experiment prove” returned several answers, most of them being that it tested whether the ether existed or it allowed measuring the speed of light very closely.
The Physics and Our Universe course at The Great Courses mentioned the speed of light in a vacuum compared to the observer being the same regardless of the motion of the observer but I will have to view it again before I say more.
The first physics course I took in grad school required me to make a hypothesis and design an experiment to test it. I was interested in low temperature physics and did a heat transfer experiment. After my 2nd semester, having had enough poverty, I took a position at a computer company in my home town.
I’m curious about AE’s testing the items your 4th paragraph identifies. He was said to have been a theoretical physicist and did no empirical work.
@David_Cooper Thanks for your posts, David.
I’m ninety and when I started college Sigmund Freud was revered. He became a mere mortal and Albert Einstein is on his way to becoming another. ( I will copy this to the top of this long discussion so more people can find your comment. )
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.