What is "speed"?

[Roshi]

If two spaceships approach each other, without any acceleration, which of them is moving?

Some may say: "the spaceships can check the stars to see if they are moving or not in relation to the Universe". So - one of the spaceships is not moving in relation to the Universe. But can you say that it's not that spaceship + entire Universe moving while the other is not?

Without a history of acceleration of each object, since the moment of "creation", you cannot say who is moving and who is not. Let's say the Universe is created, and it contains those 2 spaceships only. Then - the one that accelerated first, is moving. But once it stops accelerating - does it make any difference? Again - without checking the history of accelerations, nobody can tell which spaceship is moving.

So, what is "speed"? A change in distance between objects. In "time" of course, everything happens in "time" - meaning there is an order of events.
I am asking this question because - according to mainstream "dilation laws", special things happen on the "moving" spaceship, and not on the "stationary" spaceship.

"Speed" does not exist in fact, as a phenomenon. Movement exists, and we can count some ticks and measure distance traveled during a number of clock ticks. But speed - is a derived quantity, it does nothing. Else I ask - how does it accomplish those mass, length or "time" dilations, if we can't even know who is moving.

[crawler]

If two spaceships approach each other, without any acceleration, which of them is moving?

Some may say: "the spaceships can check the stars to see if they are moving or not in relation to the Universe". So - one of the spaceships is not moving in relation to the Universe. But can you say that it's not that spaceship + entire Universe moving while the other is not?

Without a history of acceleration of each object, since the moment of "creation", you cannot say who is moving and who is not. Let's say the Universe is created, and it contains those 2 spaceships only. Then - the one that accelerated first, is moving. But once it stops accelerating - does it make any difference? Again - without checking the history of accelerations, nobody can tell which spaceship is moving.

So, what is "speed"? A change in distance between objects. In "time" of course, everything happens in "time" - meaning there is an order of events.
I am asking this question because - according to mainstream "dilation laws", special things happen on the "moving" spaceship, and not on the "stationary" spaceship.

"Speed" does not exist in fact, as a phenomenon. Movement exists, and we can count some ticks and measure distance traveled during a number of clock ticks. But speed - is a derived quantity, it does nothing. Else I ask - how does it accomplish those mass, length or "time" dilations, if we can't even know who is moving.

There are 2 kinds of moovment. (1) Moovment relative to an observer. (2) Moovment relative to the aether, ie relative to an observer who feels an aetherwind of zero kmps (ie who haz zero speed in the absolute reference frame).

Observer (2) sees true velocity or absolute velocity, because (2)'s rods & clocks have an absolute ticking rate & an absolute length (but only if (2) has zero mass & is not near other mass)(mass slows em radiation, & hencely affects rods & clocks).

Observer (1) karnt see true V or absolute V, but nearnuff can if the aetherwind blowing throo (1) is not very fast (& if not too near too much mass). This is koz (1)'s rods & clocks are affected by the aetherwind (& mass) in a similar but opposit way, ie (1)'s rods contract whilst (1)'s clocks slow, ie they negate (but not necessarily exactly) re the measurement of speed (& probly velocity).

One problem for (1) is that the equation for LC is allmost certainly not the same as the equations for TD. The equation for TD will vary a lot for different kinds of macro clock, & will vary a bit for the same kind of macro clock but of a different make or size etc. The equation for the TD for any one macro clock will depend on length, & that length depends on LC. And every kind of macro clock (pendulum, tuning fork, balance wheel etc)will hav a very different equation. Atomic clocks (ie micro clocks) might hav an equation very similar to the equation for LC, so best use an atomic clock.

Here we might dwell on the fact that LC is not prooven. I think that aetherwind & nearness to mass must affect the electrostatic & dynamic forces inside & tween electrons & protons & atoms & molecules & objects in some way, thusly affecting shape & size of each of these, but we simply simplify that by just calling it LC.

There is no mass dilation. Mass is fixed. However the measurement of apparent mass might vary depending on the aetherwind & on the nearness to other mass, ie due to changes in our rods & clocks. But mass is fixed. Here i am talking about inertial mass, not gravitational mass. There is no such thing as gravitational mass, or at least it karnt be measured, & hencely GM is probly of no scientific use. All of our mass measurements are inertial, ie we measure IM.

There is no such thing as time & no such thing as time dilation. It is ticking dilation.

U mention mainstream laws, meaning of course Einsteinian STR & GTR. None of that is real. STR is a clever mathtrick that gives goodish numbers in some instances very quickly & simply. But in the modern era we need better equations. And i am the only one who hazzem.

[Aardwolf]

I wouldn't waste any time even thinking about it as "time dilation" as a phenomenon is easily broken by any truly critical mind.

We're told that the reason one twin's time is slowed is because of acceleration away, yet when they return their time must be back up to normal speed. However this in inherent garbage. How does the travelling twin know the difference between acceleration and deceleration? That is dependent on the direction of travel from the origin, and how can that have any meaning in relativity? As far as this twin is concerned they accelerated away, rotated the ship and then accelerated back, then rotated and accelerated away again. To the twin all those movements feels like acceleration so why when he lands has time miraculously returned to normal?

To confirm the above effects lets say instead both twins accelerate away from Earth together heading North then stop accelerating and drift. They're together so time has slowed for both. Now one twin wants to accelerate away again but can choose North, East, South or West. Relativity will tell us that for the twin that accelerates away time will slow. So if they head South (back to Earth) time will slow, as relativity predicts. Cleary this is untenable. Relativists on Earth will say he's decelerating and his time speeds up. Relativists with the stationary twin will say he's accelerating and time will slow down!

Time dilation is garbage and relates to the observers perception only (just as Einsteins examples clearly state). If something speeds away from you it appears that time will slow as you observe it because of the increasing distance that the light has to travel over time, and vice versa when heading back.

[Roshi]

Another approach about how to solve the "twins paradox" being caused by "changing the reference frame" as wikipedia explains it (just speed can't explain it, even if the time dilation formula contains only speed):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_para ... multaneity

There are three twins: one is on planet X. He got there accelerating very little for just a moment, then he had constant speed, over billions of years. They are immortal. They could even be rocks, not twins. Three identical rocks: A, B ,C

Rock A on Earth, rock C on planet X.

Traveling rock B leaves Earth, arrives at planet X. Here he meets rock C. Rock B is still identical to rock A left on Earth, and rock C found on planet X. Now - rock B starts going back to Earth, and "changes his reference frame", and now the magic happens and the rock remains younger they say.
Instead of this - rock C identical to rock B, goes to Earth. Similar to the first situation - when he gets to Earth all three rocks are still equal. Why would things be different if rock B (identical to C) would have traveled back? Does the Universe keep track of changes in direction? How ? Where is this in the time dilation formula?

Ok, nevermind time dilation and magic younger twins.


What is speed?
2 ships approach each other, even if they themselves feel like they are standing still, and surely the other object must be "moving", because it's coming their way. Both ships consider this to be true, and in fact cannot know (as I said before), who is "moving".

But something is happening, they are approaching each other. So - who is moving? Does it even matter?

(2 ships in space. On the ocean they can see who is moving in relation to the sea)

[rickard]

Since in the universe there are not only "two space ships" but an infinte amount of heavenly bodies, I think your question is purely hypothetical and of very limited interest ......

But speed and movement are closely interconnected and since all planets, stars and galaxies are moving with different speed and in different directions, in the infinite universe every direction and every speed are represented, and this means that seen in the perspective of eternity all the infinite movements "outweighs" each other, and in reality the universe is total stillness.

[Aardwolf]

Does the Universe keep track of changes in direction? How ? Where is this in the time dilation formula?

This is the key to the problem that relativists cant seem to fathom out. According to the travelling twin, every movement in every direction is always acceleration. Which means according to relativity his time can only ever be slowed. The only way for your local time to "speed up" again is for the twin to experience NEGATIVE acceleration, which is not the same as deceleration. The expectation that just because you travel back to where you started, time runs normally again is completely absurd. Who is giving the twin's body instructions about the direction he is moving relative to where he started so he knows he's decelerating (relative to the start point) and therefore time should start speeding up again? God?

This is what happens when you let maths blind your understanding of reality.

[Xantos]

This is a problem of information.

Have you ever twitched at the red light stop, because other car next to you started going and you thought you're going reverse while actually you stood still? It's the same thing. In the absence of your own information about your own movement, there is no way to know who exactly is moving.

If you know you accelerated, then you know you're moving, therefore you know for a fact that at least you are moving and there is no problem. If you just teleported into one of the spaceships, without instruments measuring speed or knowing beforehand, if that particular ship was accelerating, there is no way of knowing which one is moving.

Don't try to conflate all the rest of physical effects with "the two spaceships not knowing which one's moving" problem.

Speed is a translational rate of change of position. And this translation of particles through 3D space causes other atoms / particles to give way and produce all sorts of effects, effectively very similar from quantum to macro level - Fractal Principle.

[crawler]

This is a problem of information.

Have you ever twitched at the red light stop, because other car next to you started going and you thought you're going reverse while actually you stood still? It's the same thing. In the absence of your own information about your own movement, there is no way to know who exactly is moving.

If you know you accelerated, then you know you're moving, therefore you know for a fact that at least you are moving and there is no problem. If you just teleported into one of the spaceships, without instruments measuring speed or knowing beforehand, if that particular ship was accelerating, there is no way of knowing which one is moving.

Don't try to conflate all the rest of physical effects with "the two spaceships not knowing which one's moving" problem.

Speed is a translational rate of change of position. And this translation of particles through 3D space causes other atoms / particles to give way and produce all sorts of effects, effectively very similar from quantum to macro level - Fractal Principle.

That happened to me at the lights. I thort i woz going backwards. But i found that i woz standing still, & the VW woz going round me in circles.

[fencewalker]

speed is change in distance over time. mathematically it is dD/dt.
that's it. distance is always measured from one point to another. in engineering, u have to pick a reference point. distance, velocity, acceleration are all in reference to that point.

[crawler]

This is a problem of information.

Have you ever twitched at the red light stop, because other car next to you started going and you thought you're going reverse while actually you stood still? It's the same thing. In the absence of your own information about your own movement, there is no way to know who exactly is moving.

If you know you accelerated, then you know you're moving, therefore you know for a fact that at least you are moving and there is no problem. If you just teleported into one of the spaceships, without instruments measuring speed or knowing beforehand, if that particular ship was accelerating, there is no way of knowing which one is moving.

Don't try to conflate all the rest of physical effects with "the two spaceships not knowing which one's moving" problem.

Speed is a translational rate of change of position. And this translation of particles through 3D space causes other atoms / particles to give way and produce all sorts of effects, effectively very similar from quantum to macro level - Fractal Principle.

That happened to me at the lights. I thort i woz going backwards. But i found that i woz standing still, & the VW woz going round me in circles.

So i fixed that, but then i found that we were both standing still except that i woz spinning.

[Prospector]

Two conductors separated by an insulator form a capacitor and will store an electric charge. The charge is stored in the insulator. The amount of charge depends on the material in the insulator and scientists call that (Greek letter) eta. If the insulator is a vacuum, the charge does not go to zero. A vacuum will store an electric charge. The measurement for a vacuum is called eta sub zero.

When a charge moves it generates a magnetic field in whatever material surrounds the path, called core. The amount of field depends on the material in the core and scientists call that (Greek letter) mu. If the core is a vacuum the field does not go to zero. A vacuum will store a magnetic field. The measurement for a vacuum is called mu sub zero.
Engineers use a simple formula to calculate the speed at which a signal moves through a transmission line based on the measured mu and eta. If you plug in mu sub zero and eta sub zero you get the speed of light in a vacuum, exactly.

Experiment: Measure the speed of light in your ship, first while stopped and then while moving. This would be similar to the Michael-Morely experiment except they only tested one plane and they should have tested three.

[fencewalker]

hmmm...@prospector - i c it differently.
the electric and/or magnetic field aren't stored in the surrounding material, but emanating from an elecrtic/magnetic source.
light is easily imagined as a beam emanating from it's source, but that is inaccurate. light is emitted in a spherical shape, expanding radially at the speed of light.
perpendicular to the radial direction of movement, we detect electric and magnetic waves perpendicular to each other.
i had not previously understood where they came up with permittivity and permeability constants, thanks for that.
it explains why the hubble constant has the 0 subscript.

[lindagriffithh]

Wow, you hacked my brain today!

[Sci-Phy]

The main problem in relativity physics is that it is not real.
Take a look at any of the Einstein's thought experiment - everything started with emitting the light and received it back. All formulas about moving spaceship is the formulas how this moving ship looks from stationary one. It is not about time on real ship - it is how the time on moving ship is visible to us. How speed of light is connected to causality? Do I obey the principle of causality playing the tape backwards?
It is a lot of dark moments in relativity. In my opinion there is no "twin paradox" at all.
http://www.sci-phy.ca/papers/Relativity ... radox.html

[crawler]

The main problem in relativity physics is that it is not real.
Take a look at any of the Einstein's thought experiment - everything started with emitting the light and received it back. All formulas about moving spaceship is the formulas how this moving ship looks from stationary one. It is not about time on real ship - it is how the time on moving ship is visible to us. How speed of light is connected to causality? Do I obey the principle of causality playing the tape backwards?
It is a lot of dark moments in relativity. In my opinion there is no "twin paradox" at all.
http://www.sci-phy.ca/papers/Relativity ... radox.html

Thanx. I had a look. And i looked at links, & links in the links. Some nice stuff there. Thats why i am here, to learn. In particular i learnt about Wheatstone's experiment on the velocity of electricity. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/ ... .1834.0031 It is similar to Ivor Catt's stuff (& Forrest Bishop). Touching on IAAAD.

Re E=mcc, i agree that this is komplete krapp. Any such equation arizing from mere use of a pencil & paper can only be arrived at by uzing circular reasoning. Ives said so, & i agree.