Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

aggle-rithm said:
If the ships were moving towards each other, then time on the other ship would appear to speed up because the Doppler shift overwhelms the time compression...is that right? As I understand it, this is the key to solving the Twin's Paradox riddle.
Click to expand...

That depends on what you mean by "appear to speed up".

If you looked through a telescope, you'd see people on the approaching ship moving fast. If a bat (which "sees" with sound) listened to an approaching cart full of people, it would also "see" them moving fast for the same reason.

But if you made an adjustment for the Doppler shift, you'd discover that after the adjustment they were actually moving slow. That's time dilation.
 
excaza said:
Absolutely? We don't. What we do know is that we can use the theory to successfully predict the behavior of things around us.


If found to be valid, the findings would just refine the theory, not falsify the entire thing completely. Just like relativity did not falsify Newtonian physics. It just highlighted assumptions required for Newtonian physics to correctly describe the behavior of the things around us and explain when and why the predictions break down.
Click to expand...

Refine the theory? Maybe, but I doubt that. Time is not a dimension.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Even if my understanding is false, how do you know that the theory itself is correct? Doesn't the findings at CERN point to the very opposite of what you claim?
Click to expand...

We are comparing apples and oranges here.

The findings at CERN conflict with your understanding of relativity, which is flawed.

There are a couple of different ways that the findings at CERN could be in complete agreement with Einstein's ACTUAL theory. For instance, they could be detecting tachyons, which are allowable according to Einstein's theory. Or, it could be behavior on a quantum level that can never translate to the macroscopic level, which is what relativity deals with.
 
Anders Lindman said:
The POSITION of a photon can be a reference frame. But I guess SR can't deal with that.
Click to expand...

More nonsense. The position of a photon is a single point. How can a single point be a coordinate system?

You don't even understand the meanings of the terms you're using. How can you possibly disprove a theory if you don't even understand the words we use to discuss it (let alone the math)?
 
Anders Lindman said:
I suspect that the 'accurate' observations are hoaxes, created by gatekeeper scientists to make people continue to believe in the fraudulent theories.
Click to expand...

Your suspicion is based ENTIRELY on your personal incredulity, which carries absolutely no weight outside of your own mind.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, so you do admit that the velocity between the photons from the lab's reference frame is 2c? Because the theory only deals with one object. Fair enough. But then the theory can only deal with a universe with one particle in it. Not very useful.
Click to expand...

No, the velocity of each photon is c, the difference between them is 2c
 
sol invictus said:
More nonsense. The position of a photon is a single point. How can a single point be a coordinate system?

You don't even understand the meanings of the terms you're using. How can you possibly disprove a theory if you don't even understand the words we use to discuss it (let alone the math)?
Click to expand...

You can rotate all you want. The relative velocity between two photons traveling in opposite directions will still be 2c.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I suspect that the 'accurate' observations are hoaxes, created by gatekeeper scientists to make people continue to believe in the fraudulent theories.
Click to expand...

I suspect then that GPS would not work and that partcicle accelerators are just large pin wheels that draw huge amounts of electricity to increase the CO2 out put and increase global warming.
 
Last edited:
aggle-rithm said:
There are a couple of different ways that the findings at CERN could be in complete agreement with Einstein's ACTUAL theory. For instance, they could be detecting tachyons, which are allowable according to Einstein's theory. Or, it could be behavior on a quantum level that can never translate to the macroscopic level, which is what relativity deals with.
Click to expand...

That's kind of true, but it gives the wrong impression. If the findings (which are not really "at" CERN, they're based on detections at a lab in Gran Sasso) are correct, it really does overturn a huge chunk of modern physics. Faster-than-light particles cause what seem to be insurmountable theoretical difficulties in relativistic theories. And relativistic quantum mechanics does not allow FTL signals.

There are ways in which this might be consistent with some speculative theories, but those theories are not relativistic (SR is only an approximation according to them).
 
Anders Lindman said:
On the contrary. You are not up to speed. Consider the topic. Science has found that particles can travel faster than the speed of light. So Einstein's theory is obviously false. And wouldn't that explain the messy attempts of finding a 'unifying' theory? Or would you rather ignore these new findings and continue to support further study into superstrings and membranes and umpteen dimensions?
Click to expand...

Ah, so you don'rt know the possible sources of error and assert that c is not invariant?

It is on average invariant, HUP does enter the picture.
 
I'd like to know what a 'photon' even is in a universe that's not relativistic.

It's not a dig against the current discussion (that's bonus)... I'm actually curious as to what extent fields on a Galilean background can be quantized and what physical properties would pop out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom