"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.