Where results make sense

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   PR   |   Contact us

Topic: Relativity of simultaneity

    Note: these results are not from the primary (high quality) database.

absolute.html As existence is absolute if reality were a single 3D world all kinematic consequences of SR would not be possible as shown above for the relativity of simultaneity and the twin paradox; time dilation and length contraction would not be possible either, if the relativity of simultaneity were impossible. This in turn shows that existence is absolute and the relativity of simultaneity is possible only in a 4D reality. However, we have seen that those two cases either lead to a direct contradiction with the relativity of simultaneity (if the existence of the present and the privileged state of a set of events of Minkowski spacetime are absolute) or to a relativization of existence. alcor.concordia.ca /~scol/seminars/absolute.html

GOD AND REAL TIME The relativity of simultaneity depends upon the assumption that there is no preferred reference frame; but if there exists a preferred frame, as the Lorentzian interpretation would have it, then the relations of simultaneity in it would be absolute, and relativity would apply to all other frames. Given that God is in time, therefore, it is evident that His is not the time which is determined by Einstein's operational definitions and subject to dilation, the relativity of simultaneity, and inversion of events. {18} For alternative operational definitions of "simultaneity" and "synchronization" which preserve absolute simultaneity see T. Sjödin, "On the One-Way Velocity of Light and its Possible Measurability," paper presented at the conference Physical Interpretations of Relativity Theory, British Society for the Philosophy of Science, Imperial College, London, 16-19 September, 1988. www.leaderu.com /offices/billcraig/docs/realtime.html

Hans Reichenbach [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] The relativity of simultaneity is due to the finite velocity of causal propagation. Reichenbach asserts that the relativity of simultaneity is independent from the relativity of motion. Einstein - Reichenbach says - does not prove the speed of light is constant, but the special theory of relativity assumes it is constant, ie it is constant by definition. www.iep.utm.edu /r/reichenb.htm

Why Time is Absolute, and Relative, But Never Universal Until the theory of relativity was propounded it was assumed that the conception of simultaneity had an absolute objective meaning also for events separated in space. Regardless of Einstein's faults; his many errors, and ambiguous statements in the expounding of his theory of relativity, (and translation problems?) it is not correct to fault him for introducing the relativity of simultaneity (the relativity of time) as a solution for problems in physics as many authors have done. The absolute and relative nature of time (motion/light) is difficult to grasp for anybody, particularly when our textbooks and our professors are not perfectly clear (often times because they don't grasp it well). home.pacbell.net /skeptica/time.html

sciforums.com - The Simultaneity postulate of SR/GR is Erroneous The relativity of simultaneity is not a postulate of the theory of relativity. I suggest that if the postulates of relativity are true that the derivation of simultaneity are false as directly contradicted by experimental results. When discussing the physical significance of simultaneity, the description is inextricably linked to “the observers conclusions”; This simple example stresses the rejection of the natural order of things by the definitive assumption that the observer always makes the proper assumptions about the extent of the analysis of experimental results. www.sciforums.com /showthread.php?t=36118

Relativistic Determinism This relativity of simultaneity is not a result of differences of measurement, such as those due to the unequal distance each observer has from the events in question. It is possible that the observable confirmations of relativity are compatible with a different theory that reintroduces absolute simultaneity. Because it is derived from the special theory of relativity, I will call it "relativistic determinism". members.aol.com /kiekeben/relativistic.html

Simultaneity and Absolute Velocity of Light This is known as Einstein's principle of relativity of simultaneity. The problem of simultaneity has been much studied in relativity. Instead of saying that two events simultaneous in one frame are not simultaneous in another, he should have said that there is no identity of clock displays between clocks in different frames. www.newtonphysics.on.ca /EINSTEIN/Chapter9.html

Is simultaneity relative or absolute ? Due to their conviction that the laws of nature must be identical in any inertial frame, the physicists of the beginning of the twentieth century were led to extend the relativity of Galilei to the electromagnetism of Maxwell, but this seemed to imply the abandonment of universal time and absolute simultaneity. It permits the absolute simultaneity independent of the motion of the observer, to be rediscovered. One of the concepts which has most drastically changed our vision of the world since the origin of philosophical thinking is the idea of "relativity of time". www.levynewphysics.com /2-issimultaneityrelative.htm

Being and Becoming in Modern Physics Nor is it obvious that this assumption leads to the relativity of simultaneity, though one of the joys of even elementary presentations of the subject is that this prima facie astonishing connection can be convincingly demonstrated to persistent non-specialists. To sum up, then, Sellars' attempt to tie existence to temporal notions, when properly relativized, is either a bland re-statement of what special relativity tells us already about simultaneity or an opaque statement about relativized existence. This relation of (absolute) simultaneity is an equivalence relation (That is, it is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.) that slices (partitions or foliates) the spacetime or manifold into mutually exclusive and exhaustive planes of simultaneity. www.science.uva.nl /~seop/entries/spacetime-bebecome

On an Alleged Inconsistency in Whitehead Apart from some traditional philosophical influences, this is due mainly to the fact that relativity excluded the universal cosmic "Now" as the substratum of absolute simultaneity; and since such "Now" was naturally viewed as a boundary between past and future events, its elimination was interpreted as a denial of the successive character of the world. Unfortunately, Whitehead weakened his argument by an ill-advised defense of the concept of simultaneity in his first book, referring to "blind people barking both their shins at the same moment" (PNK 53), without realizing that simultaneity at the same place is not denied by relativity. "The Problem of Simultaneity." Aristotelian Society, Supplement to Vol. www.religion-online.org /showarticle.asp?title=2814

McGraw-Hill AccessScience: Clock paradox The clock-paradox phenomenon arises because there is no notion of absolute simultaneity in the theory of special relativity. This effect is a well-defined, mathematically consistent prediction of special relativity which has been verified by experiment but, historically, it has been referred to as a paradox because of erroneous reasoning in the manner in which the effect is commonly analyzed. Look here for more information about this article. www.accessscience.com /Encyclopedia/1/14/Est_141600_frameset.html?doi

On the Ontological Status of Minkowski Space Rietdijk [2] and H. Putnam [3] concluded that relativity of simultaneity directly proves the four-dimensionality of the world. The analysis of both the problem of interpretation of the consequences of special relativity and the problem of existence also has a pedagogical value. It helps to overcome a common difficulty in teaching special relativity: the understanding of relativity of space and time and the inseparability of spacetime. alcor.concordia.ca /~vpetkov/minkowski.html

Why Time is Absolute, and Relative, But Never Universal Regardless of Einstein's faults; his many errors, and ambiguous statements in the expounding of his theory of relativity, (and translation problems?) it is not correct to fault him for introducing the relativity of simultaneity (the relativity of time) as a solution for problems in physics as many authors have done. Until the theory of relativity was propounded it was assumed that the conception of simultaneity had an absolute objective meaning also for events separated in space. relatively to which we are to regard the laws of the special theory of relativity as valid.... home.pacbell.net /skeptica/time.html

Special Relativity Invalid? (Part 1) Try to recall in how many books you have read that relativity of simultaneity means that two observers S and S' in relative motion have DIFFERENT 3D spaces (since our 3D space is the set of points at a given moment of time). Relativity is the most profound theory known to humankind (quantum mechanics is still an incomplete theory). The principle of relativity requires that an observer in S' should determine that the center of the light sphere is at O'. www.rialian.com /rnboyd/special-relativity-invalid1.htm

Chapter 9. The Relativity of Simultaneity. Einstein, Albert. 1920. Relativity: The Special and General Theory Events which are simultaneous with reference to the embankment are not simultaneous with respect to the train, and vice versa (relativity of simultaneity). Also the definition of simultaneity can be given relative to the train in exactly the same way as with respect to the embankment. But we have just seen that this assumption is incompatible with the most natural definition of simultaneity; if we discard this assumption, then the conflict between the law of the propagation of light in vacuo and the principle of relativity (developed in Section VII) disappears. www.bartleby.com /173/9.html

Whitehead, Special Relativity and Simultaneity Hence simultaneity for Whitehead is the spatial spread of events in a given inertial frame as defined by a given duration, and is Newtonian in the sense that each instantaneous space in a frame provides a single present class of all events in nature relative to that frame. 193f., for an exposition of the view that Whiteheadian relativity in the early works requires merely an intuitive definition of simultaneity. Note that this establishes the clock simultaneity of events distant from the observer, though the same determination of clock simultaneity of distant events with events of the observer’s world-line may be deduced from the description as outlined by Whitehead (PNK 51f.). www.religion-online.org /showarticle.asp?title=2552

Simultaneity in Special Relativity Most of the apparent paradoxes of special relativity arise because observers moving at different velocities relative to each other have different notions of simultaneity. Cerulean's hypersurfaces of simultaneity are not the same as Vermilion's. Spacetime diagram illustrating simultaneity from Vermilion's point of view casa.colorado.edu /~ajsh/sr/simultaneous.html

simultaneity "Simultaneity" is not an absolute concept but a relative one, depending on the state of motion of the observer. Such is the case for most experiences of daily living and this is why the relativity of simultaneity is unfamiliar. Conclusion: Simultaneity (the idea that two events are simultaneous) is a concept that depends upon the motion of the observer. patsy.hunter.cuny.edu /CORE/CORE4/LectureNotes/relativity/relativity3.htm

fano020604.html Einstein's 1916 popular exposition of relativity favours a misunderstanding of the simultaneity criticism. On the contrary, the uncertainty is a consequence of the wave-particle dualism and it is not possible to interpret it in perturbative terms, but only presupposing quantum theory in general. Like simultaneity, uncertainty is a physical issue and not an epistemological analysis. www.phys.uu.nl /~wwwgrnsl/abstracts/fano020604.html

Conventionality of Simultaneity Dropping that requirement, they show that Malament's other criteria for a simultaneity relation are then also satisfied if we fix some arbitrary event in space-time and say either that any pair of events on its backward null cone are simultaneous or, alternatively, that any pair of events on its forward null cone are simultaneous. In his first paper on the special theory of relativity, Einstein indicated that the question of whether or not two spatially separated events were simultaneous did not necessarily have a definite answer, but instead depended on the adoption of a convention for its resolution. 229) says, "Malament proved that simultaneity by standard synchronism in an inertial frame F is the only non-universal equivalence between events at different points of F that is definable (‘in any sense of "definable" no matter how weak’) in terms of causal connectibility alone, for a given F"; and Norton (Salmon et al., 1992, p. www.science.uva.nl /~seop/archives/win2003/entries/spacetime-convensimul

On the Failure of Simultaneity And so it is the tacit assumption of simultaneity of observation from frames in relative motion, taken together with the stated assumption of synchrony as observed from the rest frame, that requires agreement on the times of the events and so takes us to Einstein's conclusion. The principle of the failure of simultaneity is derived from an imagined experiment that follows these definitions, in which the rest system of two identical clocks is set in uniform motion at velocity v relative to the rest frame of a third identical clock. Together with a second experiment, this result is then shown to signify the loss of the underlying common frame both implicit in that assumption and necessary to the conservation of inertia in spatial relationships, and so further leads to a redefinition of the law of the conservation of inertia and a remodeling of relativity theory. homepage.mac.com /forever.net/Speedoftime/TCFS.html

Simultaneity The classical way of thinking about simultaneity is so ingrained in our everyday habits that we have a great deal of difficulty adjusting to what special relativity has to say about this subject. Thus, event B in the right panel of figure 4.6 occurs later than event A in the stationary reference frame and the line of simultaneity is tilted. The speed of the reference frame is given by equation (4.2), where the slope is simply the slope of the world line connecting the two events. www.physics.nmt.edu /~raymond/classes/ph13xbook/node42.html

SparkNotes: Kinematics: Postulates and the Loss of Simultaneity The most fundamental effect of the postulates of Special Relativity is to demonstrate that simultaneity (the notion of events occurring at the same time) is relative (dependent on frame of reference). The veracity of this remarkable claim has been confirmed by numerous experiments, the first of which was performed by Michelson and Morley (referred to in the introduction to this topic); their careful experiments found no difference in the speed of light as the earth rotated around the sun (changing its direction of motion). For students sick of scribbling geometry concepts on index cards, SparkNotes Study Cards are the answer. www.sparknotes.com /physics/specialrelativity/kinematics/section1.html

Special Relativity For the speeds that we normally encounter in our everyday lives, the relativistic effects we are studying now are too small to be seen readily. If light from these streetlights reaches an observer midway between these observers at the same time, the moving observers will conclude that the two lights were, indeed, turned on at the same time. The first photons from the two streetlights do, indeed, reach the Earth-bound, "midway observer" at the same time, so she concludes that the two events were simultaneous. www.ux1.eiu.edu /~cfadd/1160/Ch27SpRl/Simlt.html

The second prediction: Simultaneity is relative One concept which is radically modified by the Principle of Relativity is that of simultaneity. Thus I can say, ``I got home at the same time you got to work'' and nobody (usually) wonders about the consistency of such statement. they are simultaneous) is universal, and would be verified by any one looking into the matter. phyun5.ucr.edu /~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node75.html

Nature of Existence - Simultaneity The removal of the absolute reference frame by relativity (in response to the M&M debacle) has made it possible for otherwise responsible physicists to assert that there are logical problems associated with faster than light travel. here is a huge problem connected with the concept of simultaneity (in the relativistic sense). Then we might expect to encounter some logical problems with the aforementioned simultaneity. ebtx.com /ntx/ntx28d.htm

On The Non Relativity Of Simultaneity - Physics Help and Math Help - Physics Forums In oct 2000 I submitted a paper to the European journal of physics on the non relativity of simultaneity. You really should just say you want to see this supposed algebraic proof that simultaneity is absolute and not relative, rather than simply cling to a very misguided theory. The paper was not published, however since that time I have expanded on my original paper, and focused more on the incorrectness of the relativity of simultaneity. www.physicsforums.com /showthread.php?t=10818

PhilSci Archive - Is Simultaneity Conventional Despite Malament's Result? I call into question this inference by examining concrete alternatives and suggest that what has been overlooked is why it should be assumed that in STR simultaneity must be relative only to a frame of reference (or an inertial observer) and not to other parameters as well. Many take Malaments result that the standard Einstein simultaniety relation is uniquely definable from the causal structure of Minkowski space-time to be tantamount to a refutation of the claim that criterion for simultaneity in the special theory of relativity (STR) is a matter of convention. Rynasiewicz, Robert (2001) Is Simultaneity Conventional Despite Malament's Result?. philsci-archive.pitt.edu /documents/disk0/00/00/02/93/index.html

Simultaneity In Special Relativity Special Relativity claims that events which are simultaneous from the inertial frame of reference (or IFR) of one observer are definitely not simultaneous from the IFR of another observer moving rectilinearly at constant velocity relative to the first observer. could not possiblyoccur simultaneously in the IFR of another observer — whom we shall call Eve — if Eve is moving rectilinearly at a constant velocity v relative to Adam. is to be simultaneous in Adam’s IFR with event E homepage.mac.com /ardeshir/SimultaneityInSpRelativity.html

Space and Time: Inertial Frames The spacetime structure that is implied by special relativity is thus an affine space, like Newtonian spacetime, but it is not objectively divided into hypersurfaces of absolute simultaneity; the sets of simultaneous events for any inertial frame are the hyperplanes orthogonal to the trajectories that determine that frame. Special relativity might be said to have applied the relativity principle of Newtonian mechanics to Maxwell's electrodynamics, by eliminating the privileged status of the rest-frame of the ether and admitting that the velocity of light is independent of the motion of the source. The general theory of relativity was intended to be a generally covariant account of spacetime, and its general covariance was intended to express the general relativity of motion. plato.stanford.edu /entries/spacetime-iframes   (8696 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)

About us   |   Why use us?   |   Reviews   |   Press   |   Contact us   Copyright © 2005-2007 www.factbites.com Usage implies agreement with terms.