Timeline for What is the meaning of "clocks and rods" in special relativity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 23, 2022 at 19:42 | comment | added | WillO | "You could carry a master clock with you and adjust each clock in the lattice, one by one, by visiting it and putting the master clock and the lattice clock next to each other and adjusting the time on the lattice clock so that it matches that of the master clock." You could do this, but it wouldn't work; the traveling master clock would tick at a different rate than the lattice clocks do. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 6:03 | comment | added | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | @benrg Ha ha, I forget to ping you in the last comment. To continue, I don't mean necessarily that math or physics students should doubt what their teacher teach them. That would be okay if it led to fact checking and thought by the students. I am saying that it is a plain fact that student tend not to doubt physics and math teachers, and this is understandable. And acting as if they are already skeptical won't make them skeptical. Here's a way to make students skeptical of both professors and pseudoscience, while giving the poor students a laugh: youtube.com/watch?v=3Dp2Zqk8vHw. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 4:51 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added some text.
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 4:07 | comment | added | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | +1 A super helpful comment. I have edited my answer accordingly, adding some evidence that slow clock transportation is recognized as an equivalent to using light. Your point applies to proving Einstein's theory. My answer, however, does not attempt to prove anything, but rather attempts to explain what has already been proved by science. The OP seems to ask for explanation rather than proof. Professors, I think, would do well to stop treating students like miniature professors who need proof. This goes for physics, and perhaps even more, for math. IMHO they need to get some skepticism. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 3:58 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added a screen shot of part of "Einstein synchronization".
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 1:38 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Improved some of the English.
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 1:30 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added some text.
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 19:30 | comment | added | benrg | If you know the rules of special relativity, there are many equivalent ways you can Einstein-synchronize clocks. If you're in the middle of deriving the rules from some postulates, it's harder. How do you show that your method of synchronization is equivalent to Einstein's (or "close enough", whatever that means) without assuming what you set out to prove? Einstein used light signals not as a matter of taste, but because he'd already introduced the postulate of the constancy of the speed of light, from which he could prove properties of his method. | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 11:18 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added some text.
|
| Jul 19, 2022 at 9:44 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Replaced the paintbrush idea with charged pins encoding a binary number.
|
| Jul 18, 2022 at 5:32 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Rewrote the paragraphs on the paintbrushes; feel your way (deleting analogy with tissue and nerves).
|
| Jul 17, 2022 at 5:06 | history | edited | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added some text.
|
| Jul 17, 2022 at 2:23 | history | answered | Matthew Christopher Bartsh | CC BY-SA 4.0 |