Author Topic: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.  (Read 25674 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #175 on: April 13, 2022, 10:42:55 pm »
Quote
the aetherwind

You've been saying quite a lot that pretty much anything annihilates the aether (necessary for gravity, apparently). So... where does it come from? I mean, you can't spend 13billion years annihilating stuff without running out of it, so if essentially everything destroys it, what makes it?
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #176 on: April 13, 2022, 11:32:20 pm »
With respect to oscilloscopes:  a 350 MHz oscilloscope, depending on type, should have a rise time between 1 and 1.3 ns.
https://www.tek.com/en/support/faqs/how-bandwidth-related-rise-time-oscilloscopes
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #177 on: April 13, 2022, 11:51:39 pm »
Quote
the aetherwind
You've been saying quite a lot that pretty much anything annihilates the aether (necessary for gravity, apparently). So... where does it come from? I mean, you can't spend 13billion years annihilating stuff without running out of it, so if essentially everything destroys it, what makes it?
I like Conrad Ranzan's dynamic steady state eternal infinite cellular universe. http://www.cellularuniverse.org/
Aether is created in the center of each cosmic cell. And aether is annihilated in several possible ways.
Me myself i add that aether is an excitation of the praether, praether being the fundamental essence.

Aether is not a thing, it is a process. Everything is a process, except of course praether.
A process in a sense can't run out. Annihilation is what i call a soft annihilation, ie compared to the annihilation of a thing (which would be a hard annihilation).
« Last Edit: April 13, 2022, 11:59:15 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #178 on: April 13, 2022, 11:54:52 pm »
With respect to oscilloscopes:  a 350 MHz oscilloscope, depending on type, should have a rise time between 1 and 1.3 ns.
https://www.tek.com/en/support/faqs/how-bandwidth-related-rise-time-oscilloscopes
Howardlong posts on this forum & i see that he has access to a 20GHz scope.
He could use rods just a foot or two long. I messaged him but he has not replied.
 

Offline YurkshireLad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 365
  • Country: ca
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #179 on: April 13, 2022, 11:57:09 pm »
Cosmic cell? Praether?  |O
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #180 on: April 14, 2022, 12:04:54 am »
Cosmic cell? Praether?  |O
Conrad Ranzan is an EE. He might like my elektons. I dont think that i have asked him yet.
I dont remember him having any papers re any aspect of electricity.
He mainly deals with the aether, & the universe, & black holes, & neutrinos, & dark matter, & redshift.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2023, 06:07:41 am by aetherist »
 

Offline YurkshireLad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 365
  • Country: ca
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #181 on: April 14, 2022, 12:13:20 am »
"The Big Bang has lost its Pillars. It is no longer a viable hypothesis."

So if one random website says so, then it must be true?
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #182 on: April 14, 2022, 12:45:43 am »
"The Big Bang has lost its Pillars. It is no longer a viable hypothesis."

So if one random website says so, then it must be true?
The BigBang was invented to explain redshift.
Ranzan's explanation of cosmic redshift is brilliant. Light (each photon) is stretched as light approaches mass & as light goes away from mass.
Alltho i think Krafft (USA) came up with that same phenomenon in about 1963.

Ultimately cosmic photons stretch out of existence. Hence Olbers Paradox.
If they didnt then the sky would be infinitely bright or at least very bright & the CMBR & every other wavelength would be thousands of K.


Conrad Ranzan – 2014 – Cosmic redshift in the nonexpanding cellular universe. http://www.cellularuniverse.org/CosmicRedshift(ajaaR)-Ranzan.pdf

Ranzanian Cosmic Redshift.  Ranzan says that aether flowing towards or away from stars is stretched, & that photons are stretched with the aether.   This explains much of the observed cosmic redshift.  Doppler explains the remainder.

The RCR explanation is unique in that there is no longitudinal blurring of the light, in accordance with observation.  Alternative tired light etc redshift theories if true would create longitudinal blurring, not in accordance with observation. 

RCR also accounts for the elongation of all events & intervals, in accordance with observation.  Tired light theories all fail here.

Free photons are an excitation of the aether plus an annihilation of the aether, propagating through aether at c km/s.   Mass is made of confined photons (Williamson), what Jeans called bottled light.  Aether flows into mass to replace aether annihilated in all mass.  Aether is noncompressible, hencely the aether inflow lines converge & the aether accelerates & stretches, & photons too stretch in the aether.

Note that aether & photons stretch on approach to mass (here they have a tailwind) plus they get a second dose of stretching when departing mass (here they have a headwind), which is counterintuitive (indeed Marmet doesn't understand).

Einstein's Einstein-Shift gives a contraction on approach, but this is negated by a stretching on departure, hencely ES cant explain cosmic redshift.   Also ES must blur light both longitudinally & transversely.  ES is true, as proven by the Shapiro Delay, but ES & SD cant explain redshift.

Krafft had a stretching theory for light which didn’t involve absorption.  I don’t remember the details, it might have involved gravity, for sure it involved the ether.  Krafft (1963) – The structure of the atom.  https://www.scribd.com/document/239479092/the-Structure-of-the-Atom-by-Carl-Frederick-Krafft
On page 8 Krafft says ..........
............. It appears that the red shift can be accounted for in a more reasonable manner by assuming that each train of light waves during its journey through space will undergo a slight expansion......... ............. it would require only an extremely small difference of velocity between the waves at the front and rear ends of the train to produce the observed red shift. (Popular Astronomy, Vol 39, No. 7, p.428.)

But Ranzan didn't mention Krafft in Ranzan's notes & references.   Ranzan didn’t mention Shapiro Delay in his stretching redshift theory, but he did mention that Einsteinian gravity (ie Einstein Shift) would have zero nett effect on stretching. 

RCR  must also apply to light propagating near plasma (electrons protons neutrons etc) in deep space, but Ranzan doesn't mention this (he only refers to stars).  RCR due to plasma must be considerable.

Conrad Ranzan – DSSU papers.
http://www.cellularuniverse.org/SpRanzanProfile.htm#Papers
DSSU validated by redshift theory and structural evidence – Conrad Ranzan (2015).
http://www.cellularuniverse.org/S4-DSSUvalidation-Ranzan.pdf
Cosmic-distance redshift law without c and without h -- Conrad Ranzan (2007-2013)
http://www.cellularuniverse.org/D2CosmicDistEq_Ranzan.pdf
« Last Edit: April 14, 2022, 06:21:45 am by aetherist »
 

Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15797
  • Country: fr
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #183 on: April 14, 2022, 05:42:43 pm »
Wow. ::)
Also, this guy backs this up: https://www.infinite-energy.com/index.html
 

Offline YurkshireLad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 365
  • Country: ca
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #184 on: April 14, 2022, 07:24:27 pm »
Quote
It appears that the red shift can be accounted for in a more reasonable manner by assuming that each train of light waves during its journey through space will undergo a slight expansion

So he just made it up then.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #185 on: April 14, 2022, 07:47:04 pm »
Wow. ::)
Also, this guy backs this up: https://www.infinite-energy.com/index.html
Low Energy Nuclear Reactions & Cold Fusion might have a future. Hot fusion duznt.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #186 on: April 14, 2022, 07:52:48 pm »
Quote
It appears that the red shift can be accounted for in a more reasonable manner by assuming that each train of light waves during its journey through space will undergo a slight expansion
So he just made it up then.
Krafft had a brilliant idea here. I dont know why he mentioned a train of light, he should have said that each photon would be stretched.

Einstein's slowing of light near mass, compresses a photon during approach to mass, & stretches a photon during departure, ie it has a nett zero effect on redshift (but gives a small redshift near Earth)(if going away from the Sun).
« Last Edit: April 14, 2022, 09:19:09 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline hamster_nz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2812
  • Country: nz
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #187 on: April 15, 2022, 12:43:44 am »
Einstein's slowing of light near mass...

I expected you to pick your words more carefully...
Gaze not into the abyss, lest you become recognized as an abyss domain expert, and they expect you keep gazing into the damn thing.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #188 on: April 15, 2022, 06:27:46 am »
Einstein's slowing of light near mass...
I expected you to pick your words more carefully...
I am not sure of Einstein's exact wordage, ie the English translation. But in essence it was that light slows near mass. I dont think that he said photons. Or em radiation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro_time_delay
Wikileaks................ The Shapiro time delay effect, or gravitational time delay effect, is one of the four classic solar-system tests of general relativity. Radar signals passing near a massive object take slightly longer to travel to a target and longer to return than they would if the mass of the object were not present. The time delay is caused by spacetime dilation, which increases the time it takes light to travel a given distance from the perspective of an outside observer. In a 1964 article entitled Fourth Test of General Relativity, astrophysicist Irwin Shapiro wrote:[1]

Because, according to the general theory, the speed of a light wave depends on the strength of the gravitational potential along its path, these time delays should thereby be increased by almost 2×10−4 sec when the radar pulses pass near the sun. Such a change, equivalent to 60 km in distance, could now be measured over the required path length to within about 5 to 10% with presently obtainable equipment.

Throughout this article discussing the time delay, Shapiro uses c as the speed of light and calculates the time delay of the passage of light waves or rays over finite coordinate distance according to a Schwarzschild solution to the Einstein field equations.



Einstein’s repudiation of his own theory of relativity after 1920 ------ Peter Sujak

In Einstein’s 1913 paper [1, V4, D13, p.153] ‘Outline of the generalized theory’ we can read –

“I have shown in previous papers that the equivalence hypotheses leads to the consequence that in a static gravitational field the velocity of light c depends on the gravitational potential. This led me to the view that special theory of relativity provides only an approximation to reality; it should apply only in the limit case where differences in the gravitational potential in the spacetime region under consideration are not too great”.

As the gravitational potential is changing in space from a star to a star, from a galaxy to a galaxy so according to the 1913 paper velocity of light in vacuum is no longer the constant and is changing (standard supposition of physicist before 1905). This means in fact an abolition of the first principle of STR which is based on firm proclamation that the velocity of light is the ultimate and constant velocity in the vacuum of the void space, that no carrying substance of the light propagation exists and that nothing can influence on the ultimate velocity of the light in the vacuum.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2022, 02:42:35 am by aetherist »
 

Offline hamster_nz

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2812
  • Country: nz
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #189 on: April 15, 2022, 08:44:27 am »
Einstein's slowing of light near mass...
I expected you to pick your words more carefully...
I am not sure of Einstein's exact wordage, ie the English translation. But in essence it was that light slows near mass. I dont think that he said photons. Or em radiation.

I was more thinking about "slowing" rather than the "light". I just thought you would have used "light takes longer to travel" as the speed of light in vacuum is a constant.
Gaze not into the abyss, lest you become recognized as an abyss domain expert, and they expect you keep gazing into the damn thing.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #190 on: April 15, 2022, 07:47:44 pm »
Einstein's slowing of light near mass...
I expected you to pick your words more carefully...
I am not sure of Einstein's exact wordage, ie the English translation. But in essence it was that light slows near mass. I dont think that he said photons. Or em radiation.
I was more thinking about "slowing" rather than the "light". I just thought you would have used "light takes longer to travel" as the speed of light in vacuum is a constant.
Aetherists mostly believe that the speed of light is constant, c, in the aether. They are wrong. Einstein said that light is slowed near mass, ie if in a gravity field, as proven by Shapiro. Einstein was wrong, partly, possibly.

I have explained that light is slowed by gross gravity, not nett gravity. So, i would have to ask Einstein whether his equations should apply to gross gravitational potential or nett. If he said gross, then i would say that he was correct.

In the instance of radar & Venus gross & nett are the same thing (very nearly), hence Shapiro didn’t have to decide tween gross & nett. Not that Shapiro was aware of the problem.
And i can add that Shapiro's equation was fudged. I think that Einstein's field equations always have to be fudged, at least a little.

I clearly remember a paper that Einstein wrote where he explicitly said that in GTR the STR naïve statement that the speed of light was constant did not apply. Unless the lab was far away from any mass, which is impossible (my words). He might have used the words 'in distant space'. English translation of course.

Its difficult to know whether to say "light takes longer to travel", koz nothing is real in GTR, all such things are only apparent. Each observer has her own spacetime. Light appears to take longer. Light appears to bend, etc.

Einstein said that a half of the slowing was due to time dilation, & a half was due to space (length contraction). Wrong. Time dilation duznt exist. Length contraction is true, but has no effect on slowing. When i say length contraction is true, i mean neoLorentz length contraction (ie due to aetherwind), not STR length contraction (due to relative velocity).

Slowing is due to photaeno drag, which i won't go into today.

I believe that the slowing of light might accord with the standard equation for gamma. U insert the escape velocity in the V in the VV/cc.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2022, 07:52:08 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #191 on: April 17, 2022, 09:19:38 am »
Herr has a nice summary of variance & invariance in STR, with of course the usual STR assumptions & suppositions elevated to the better sounding postulates & principles & laws, & the usual lies & lack of good logic.

https://cds.cern.ch/record/2674125/files/337.pdf
Short Overview of Special Relativity and Invariant Formulation of Electrodynamics
 W. Herr CERN, Geneva, Switzerland
Abstract
The basic concepts of special relativity are presented in this paper. Consequences for the design and operation of particle accelerators are discussed, along with applications. Although all branches of physics must fulfil the principles of special relativity, the focus of this paper is the application to electromagnetism. The formulation of physics laws in the form of four-vectors allows a fully invariant formulation of electromagnetic theory and a reformulation of Maxwell’s equations. This significantly simplifies the treatment of moving charges in electromagnetic fields and can explain some open questions.

9 Summary
9.1 Summary—relativity basics
– Special relativity is very simple; there are a few basic principles.
– Physics laws are the same in all inertial systems.
– The speed of light in vacuum is the same in all inertial systems.
– Everyday phenomena lose their meaning (do not ask what is ‘real’).
– Only the union of space and time preserve an independent reality: space–time.

SHORT OVERVIEW OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY AND INVARIANT FORMULATION OF ELECTRODYNAMICS

– Electric and magnetic fields do not exist!
– They are simply different aspects of a single electromagnetic field.
– The manifestation of the electromagnetic field, i.e., division into electric E~ and magnetic B~components, depends on the chosen reference frame.
 

Offline TimFox

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9002
  • Country: us
  • Retired, now restoring antique test equipment
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #192 on: April 17, 2022, 02:04:24 pm »
"Consequences for the design and operation of particle accelerators are discussed"

Last I heard, the major particle accelerators (CERN, Fermilab, DESY, etc.) work well when following this process.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #193 on: April 17, 2022, 03:30:36 pm »
"Consequences for the design and operation of particle accelerators are discussed"

Last I heard, the major particle accelerators (CERN, Fermilab, DESY, etc.) work well when following this process.
Today i have been looking into invariance, ie re inertial frames. Einsteinists suppose that some things are invariant, i think charge rest-mass c etc.

I wanted to see what Lorentzists & neoLorentzists (ie aetherists) reckoned. But no luck, they dont say much re charge rest-mass c etc.

I think that almost everything changes with velocity, at least a little. A different velocity means a different aetherwind. Aetherwind gives length contraction. However, this length contraction applies equally to the object in question & to the measuring rods, hence we have Lorentz invariance for apparent length (ie for perceived length). But, we don’t necessary have Lorentz invariance for apparent distance.

For example, if 2 spaceships, one following the other, joined tail to nose by a tight weak string, were to accelerate, then an aetherist would say that the string would break, koz the 2 spaceships & the string all length contract.  The real distance (gap) tween the 2 spaceships dilates as the spaceships accelerate & contract. And the apparent gap dilates (ie it appears to be larger)(koz the measuring rods on the spaceships suffer length contraction. The real distance & real mass & real anything are what is seen by an observer in the rest frame, ie in the absolute frame, ie where there is zero aetherwind.

Re the spaceships & string. I should have said that the spaceships have a headwind. If they initially had a fast tailwind then as they accelerated their real lengths, & the real length of the string, would all dilate (get longer), & the string would slacken (at first)(ie the string would not contract). But the real gap & the apparent gap tween the spaceships would shorten, & the apparent length of the string would shorten.

This kind of length contraction & real length variance or apparent length invariance are a no-brainer. And real anything is a no-brainer. But, apparent anything can get complicated. I have never thort about this very deeply. It makes my brain hurt.

The apparent say force might be measured a number of ways. Each different way will involve a different apparent result. Measurement might involve a standard mass, or a standard spring, & praps a clock of some kind (eg atomic, or balance wheel, or quartz, or pendulum etc), & praps a say rod. The ticking rate of every kind of clock etc will be affected in a different way by length contraction. Some clocks might tick faster rather than slower.

Time has no effect (on the measurement of force), there being no such thing as time, or time dilation. What we have is real ticking, & apparent ticking.

Whether mass force charge temperature etc etc have certain real values & certain apparent values (in moving frames) is complicated. The answer has to be that everything is apparently variant, nothing is apparently invariant.

Even the length of our rods is variant, both in the real sense & in the apparent sense. Its like this. The length contraction of an object depends on the size & shape of the elementary particles of the object, & the em forces within the atoms & molecules, & the em forces tween the atoms & molecules. Different substances will have different kinds of em forces acting, or i should say the same kinds of em forces but acting in different ways. Hence every object, every substance (eg steel rod)(wooden rod), will have its own gamma for length contraction. And, as i already said, that there gamma will depend on how u measure, eg it will depend on your choice of measuring instruments.

Some things will be less apparently variant, ie almost apparently invariant (especially if one uses very standardized instruments)(or instruments designed to give a less variant result). But i don’t know what these things might be (eg mass, force, charge, temperature etc). Still thinking.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2022, 03:44:40 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #194 on: April 17, 2022, 04:43:22 pm »
Quote
then an aetherist would say that the string would break, koz the 2 spaceships & the string all length contract

Really? My simplistic understanding is that for speed of light to remain constant, for the observer in the static reference the spaceships (and string) must appear to contract, otherwise light in the moving reference would either be slower in the moving reference or seem to be faster than the speed of light from the static reference. The contraction allows the speed of light to be constant regardless of reference.

But then it also follows that the distance between spaceships must also appear to contract, otherwise light passing from one ship to the other would seem to slow in the moving reference. Alternatively, if it remained c in the moving reference it would seem to be faster than c in the static reference. Thus the space contraction.

So the space contracts exactly the same as the string, and the string doesn't sag or break.

I think your problem with this is that you apply contraction (and similar) to physical entities rather than the reference in which they reside.

Of course, I am not a physicist nor a scientist in any shape or form, so I could be as massively wrong about this as you. Happy to be put right by someone in the know.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #195 on: April 17, 2022, 07:58:03 pm »
Quote
then an aetherist would say that the string would break, koz the 2 spaceships & the string all length contract
Really? My simplistic understanding is that for speed of light to remain constant, for the observer in the static reference the spaceships (and string) must appear to contract, otherwise light in the moving reference would either be slower in the moving reference or seem to be faster than the speed of light from the static reference. The contraction allows the speed of light to be constant regardless of reference.

But then it also follows that the distance between spaceships must also appear to contract, otherwise light passing from one ship to the other would seem to slow in the moving reference. Alternatively, if it remained c in the moving reference it would seem to be faster than c in the static reference. Thus the space contraction.

So the space contracts exactly the same as the string, and the string doesn't sag or break.

I think your problem with this is that you apply contraction (and similar) to physical entities rather than the reference in which they reside.

Of course, I am not a physicist nor a scientist in any shape or form, so I could be as massively wrong about this as you. Happy to be put right by someone in the know.

U are talking bout the silly Einsteinian solution, which is Bell's spaceship paradox. I was talking bout the likely aetherian solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_spaceship_paradox
Bell's spaceship paradox is a thought experiment in special relativity. It was designed by E. Dewan and M. Beran in 1959[1] and became more widely known when J. S. Bell included a modified version.[2] A delicate thread hangs between two spaceships. They start accelerating simultaneously and equally as measured in the inertial frame S, thus having the same velocity at all times as viewed from S. Therefore, they are all subject to the same Lorentz contraction, so the entire assembly seems to be equally contracted in the S frame with respect to the length at the start. At first sight, it might appear that the thread will not break during acceleration.

This argument, however, is incorrect as shown by Dewan and Beran and Bell.[1][2] The distance between the spaceships does not undergo Lorentz contraction with respect to the distance at the start, because in S, it is effectively defined to remain the same, due to the equal and simultaneous acceleration of both spaceships in S. It also turns out that the rest length between the two has increased in the frames in which they are momentarily at rest (S′), because the accelerations of the spaceships are not simultaneous here due to relativity of simultaneity. The thread, on the other hand, being a physical object held together by electrostatic forces, maintains the same rest length. Thus, in frame S, it must be Lorentz contracted, which result can also be derived when the electromagnetic fields of bodies in motion are considered. So, calculations made in both frames show that the thread will break; in S′ due to the non-simultaneous acceleration and the increasing distance between the spaceships, and in S due to length contraction of the thread.

In the following, the rest length[3] or proper length[4] of an object is its length measured in the object's rest frame. (This length corresponds to the proper distance between two events in the special case, when these events are measured simultaneously at the endpoints in the object's rest frame.[4])
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #196 on: April 17, 2022, 08:05:53 pm »
No, I was talking about the Einstein solution. You may have been talking about the silly aetherist solution.
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #197 on: April 17, 2022, 08:49:44 pm »
No, I was talking about the Einstein solution. You may have been talking about the silly aetherist solution.
Yes i was talking bout the aetherist answer. U said....
I think your problem with this is that you apply contraction (and similar) to physical entities rather than the reference in which they reside.
In aether theory contraction applies to solids, not to space, not to gas, not to liquids.
Alltho contraction applies to gas particles & liquid particles, & their containers if any.

In the case of electrons propagating along a stationary wire, aetherists say that the electrons might be individually length contracted, but the spacings tween centers is not contracted, & the gaps are then of course dilated. Hence there can be no explanation for the magnetic field around a wire that might be similar to the silly STR explanation (of this thread).

Actually, if the electrons contract & if the gaps dilate then the electrons will want to move closer together, in which case given enuff time they will, in which case the charge of the wire will grow more negative, if electrons can somehow enter the wire from the environment. In which case aether theory results in a (very weak) relativistic explanation for mmf around a current carrying wire (somewhat similar to STR theory)(but much weaker).
« Last Edit: April 17, 2022, 09:20:40 pm by aetherist »
 

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7508
  • Country: va
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #198 on: April 17, 2022, 09:53:25 pm »
In silly aether theory, if it applies only to solids what  happens when, say, copper is melted. Or vaporized? Is a plasma solid, liquid or gas or something else, and does silly aether theory apply to that?
 

Offline aetheristTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 621
  • Country: au
  • The aether will return. It never left.
Re: Veritasium -- How Special Relativity Makes Magnets Work.
« Reply #199 on: April 17, 2022, 10:10:46 pm »
In silly aether theory, if it applies only to solids what  happens when, say, copper is melted. Or vaporized? Is a plasma solid, liquid or gas or something else, and does silly aether theory apply to that?
All solids are length contracted. Atoms of gas & liquid (eg melted Cu) are length contracted. But, bulk gases & bulk liquids themselves can't length contract, they just fill their container (as usual), it is their container that length contracts.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf