Thanks for that! You seem to know the subject well. What exactly does it *mean* to say SR can be used for non-inertial frames? Or, do you deny the claim that SR *can* be used for non-inertial frames? AG
On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 8:25:41 AM UTC-7 jessem wrote: > The Lorentz transformation is specifically meant for transforming between > inertial frames, it can't generally be used to transform between > non-inertial frames (you could construct a pair of non-inertial coordinate > systems that were related by the Lorentz transformation if you wanted, just > like you could construct a pair of non-inertial frames related by the > Galilei transformation or whatever transformation you wish--as I said to > John Clark, there's no 'canonical' way to construct a non-inertial > coordinate system in relativity, you can define one basically however you > like). However, all the physical consequences of the postulate that the > laws of physics are Lorentz-invariant can be specified in terms of > different equations that would apply in a non-inertial frame, and these > equations can be derived by using whatever coordinate transformation was > used to define the non-inertial frame's coordinates relative to an inertial > coordinate system. > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 8:07 AM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Jessem: I was wondering if the LT can be used to determine how the laws >> of physics change between two accelerating frames, accelerating at the same >> rate but moving in opposite directions. AG >> >> On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 7:58:31 AM UTC-7 jessem wrote: >> >>> That doesn't address my specific question about whether you define the >>> "predictions of SR" in terms of the same specific equations that work in >>> inertial frames, like the time dilation equation delta-tau = delta-t * >>> sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), or whether you would define the predictions of SR in >>> terms of new equations for the non-inertial frame (which could be obtained >>> by applying a coordinate transformation that maps the coordinates of an >>> inertial frame to those of the non-inertial frame). >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 5:18 AM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> And when I used the word "true", I just meant that no observations >>>> exist which contradict the predictions of SR. AG >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 11:09:25 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I just mean, if both frames are accelerating at the same rate, will >>>>> the v in the LT, be the instantaneous relative velocity? AG >>>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 11:05:42 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Specifically, will the time dilation of a clock in an accelerating >>>>>> frame, be the same as a clock as measured for a clock in a the >>>>>> observer's >>>>>> accelerating frame, where v in the LT is the instantaneous velocity of >>>>>> the >>>>>> clock in the observer's frame at every time t in the observer's frame? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 10:54:06 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> By "valid", I mean "true". IOW, is SR limited to non-accelerating >>>>>>> frames? If the frames are accelerating, will the LT still hold for >>>>>>> relating >>>>>>> the laws of physics between those frames? AG >>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 9:58:27 PM UTC-7 jessem wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It depends what you mean by "valid". Certainly all the physical >>>>>>>> laws of relativity such as time dilation can be expressed in a >>>>>>>> non-inertial >>>>>>>> coordinate system, like Rindler coordinates. But the equations >>>>>>>> expressing >>>>>>>> these laws will not be the same in non-inertial coordinate systems, >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> example you can no longer assume that a clock moving at constant >>>>>>>> coordinate >>>>>>>> velocity for a coordinate time interval of delta-t will elapse a >>>>>>>> proper >>>>>>>> time of delta-tau = delta-t * sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 9:50 PM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Wormholes have nothing to do with my question. Please answer the >>>>>>>>> question defining this thread. TY. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 1:00:50 PM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>> meeke...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> A stable wormhole requires threading by negative energy density. >>>>>>>>>> Since no such negative energy field is know and it's existence would >>>>>>>>>> imperil the stability of matter, its existence seems highly unlikely. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Brent >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 11/15/2022 11:17 AM, spudboy100 via Everything List wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Me: Forget acronyms, or even Einstein's gravitic Reference Frame >>>>>>>>>> dragging (His movie reel analogy), Instead ask yourselves are these >>>>>>>>>> physicists correct in proposing that some black holes are wormholes? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Objects We Thought Were Black Holes May Actually Be Wormholes, >>>>>>>>>> Scientists Say (futurism.com) >>>>>>>>>> <https://futurism.com/objects-black-holes-wormholes> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> For this science fiction boy, I say interesting and maybe, >>>>>>>>>> hopeful? Let the hard science Bohr flavor of quantum mechanics and >>>>>>>>>> relativity yield for in objection, how this is fictional, >>>>>>>>>> improbable, and >>>>>>>>>> crapola? For reference frames, I know Einstein locked this in with >>>>>>>>>> time, >>>>>>>>>> which he discussed with Michele Besso (remember the letter to Beso's >>>>>>>>>> family?) but otherwise, how valuable to astronomers and physicists >>>>>>>>>> is ref >>>>>>>>>> frame dragging and all that? Does it predict do you think? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The validity of a science is its ability to predict-Vanevar Bush. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>> From: Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> To: Everything List <everyth...@googlegroups.com> >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tue, Nov 15, 2022 1:30 pm >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Is Special Relativity valid for accelerating frames >>>>>>>>>> of reference? TY. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> RA. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2022 at 6:19:02 AM UTC-7 >>>>>>>>>> johnk...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 6:38 AM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *> IHA = ?* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I Hate Acronyms. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis >>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> >>>>>>>>>> 8gfk >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>>> send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a67cbbac-69e0-40a9-8ee2-8e0caeb344d5n%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a67cbbac-69e0-40a9-8ee2-8e0caeb344d5n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>>> send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2142008288.338975.1668539879975%40mail.yahoo.com >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2142008288.338975.1668539879975%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>>>>>>> send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/527ac7d6-ada8-422f-b93f-df5b974da65fn%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/527ac7d6-ada8-422f-b93f-df5b974da65fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >>>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e1136ae4-4886-4cdb-aaa3-ca1e47a1b08fn%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e1136ae4-4886-4cdb-aaa3-ca1e47a1b08fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d32ead9c-ef89-4ac3-9518-27b53350c7fdn%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d32ead9c-ef89-4ac3-9518-27b53350c7fdn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/84db6bd9-1d24-4d74-a25d-6f18199788fbn%40googlegroups.com.
