On Thursday, January 2, 2025 at 11:37:05 PM UTC-7 Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thursday, January 2, 2025 at 11:25:00 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote: On 1/2/2025 9:06 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Thursday, January 2, 2025 at 8:56:51 PM UTC-7 Brent Meeker wrote: There's nothing "absolute" about the CMB. It's just a widely available common reference. The same way we often use the Earth as a reference. The laws of physics are the same when moving inertially relative to the CMB as relative to the Earth or Moon. Brent What does "absolute" mean? It would mean that the laws of physics were special in some sense, e.g. took a special form, in an *absolutely* stationary state. It sure seems as absolute as anyone can imagine; the same everywhere in the universe. AG No. It's just something that can be used as a reference, as could any other frame in inertial motion. And it's not even a perfect reference since some parts move relative to others. Brent I didn't think it was a problem for SR since it's not the luminiferous ether which was thought to be the only frame in which light speed was a constant. I gave the problem to Quentin as an exercise to take his mind off irrelevancies. AG I meant the only frame in which the SoL is c. In other frames, the SoL was proposed to be slower than c depending on the speed of the frame wrt the ether (where the ether was assumed to be at rest, and which defined absolute rest). AG -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/be1ae3f1-4304-484f-9f20-36cb0f0a05e5n%40googlegroups.com.
