Quote:
Originally Posted by nkgupta80  hey i'll respond to the rest later, but just to touch on the einstein thing. his point was that unless you're at the speed of light, the results given from classical mechanics are correct (very small degree off). It is only when you get to describing objects traveling near the speed of light where the descrepencies become apparent. Just to show you whwat did change. The original equations of relativity were to simply add or subtract velocities in a frame of reference. So if I'm running 5 miles an hour on a train that is traveling 50 miles an hour, my real speed is 55 miles an hour. Einstein corrected this classical notion of relativity to include the cap at the speed of light. Hence the equation is different.
galilean addition of velocities (the classic notion of relativity)
s = v + u.
relativistic addition of velocity as per einstein:
s = (v + u)/(1+(v/c)(u/c)) where c is the speed of light.
There a correction to the original model of classical mechanics. |
And how in the world it contradicts the statements of Einstein quoted by me? And where in the world “’large bodies “” of yours move with the speed of light, of massless particles? And where in the world your ‘’faster frames of references’’ in TOR are? - instead of “’slower”” and “’fixed”” frames of references. (Notice – if u=c and v=c w=2c when in TOR w cannot be >c) Classical mechanics is a particular case of TOR when TOR does not dismiss/correct classical mechanics, but adds to it, so classical mechanics in essence is a particular case of TOR. This is exactly how it has always been in physics. Aristotelian mechanics is a particular case of classical mechanics and classical mechanics is a particular case of TOR, and none of them is “”plainly wrong”’ as you state, BECAUSE OF THE ONLY ONE REASON – they all are based on observation of a phenomena! Aristotle and Newton saw things with their own eyes and those things did not change according to the rules they cannot change. The earth still turns around the sun exactly as Newton saw it. Because such additions exclusions and correction are a part of the rule 4! Read the rule 4.
So, anyway thanks for the confirmation of Einstein words quoted by me, your next step is to explain your large bodies and faster frame of reference and to confirm again that I have been correct. Where did you get this idea of yours that quoting TOR I could be incorrect about TOR? From scourge?
I hope I would be able to take a break from my existence on DP, the entertainment you put on here is very addictive, but I must try to limit it, so if I don’t reply you do not consider it is impolite. Just take the rules and apply to your statement and see my answer. Then it would be good if we could get back to TOE instead of TOR.