Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 6. The time increases as distance decreases absurdity. Next Document: 8. The data scale degradation absurdity. See reader questions & answers on this topic!  Help others by sharing your knowledge Einstein  and Special Relativity  not only mixes apples and oranges, but treats indepen dent variables as dependent variables, and vice versa. One of the first things a child learns about algebra is to not add apples and oranges. Special Relativity adds apples and orangutans. Apples and oranges are at least both fruit, so you could add them and get a fruit total. But Special Relativity adds space and time, and does so without justification. Yes, there is a derivation process (with some of the absurdities outlined above) but in no way does that derivation specify any reason why one should treat time and space as dimensions similar enough to add them up together. Yes, the units in the transform equations that mix the two together are compatible, but it is not a set of compatible measures that are con sidered a fourD coordinate system. It is not space and ct that are the four axes, it is space and t. Should we also consider heat and space similar dimensions because a balloon will rise to greater heights as its gasses warm up? Should we also consider velocity and distance similar measures because we can multiply the one by time and get distance? That's identical to the math that makes time and space suppos edly compatible measures.  The worst thing about mixing time and space as does SR, is that there is no macroworld evidence whatsoever that time can ever be a dependent variable, which is what the SR transforms make of it. A dependent variable is one that you can control indirectly, through control of other variables. You can REALLY control how great a distance you go by choosing to move for only some certain time period at the given velocity and then not going further than that distance. But you can NEVER control how long a time you 'go', no matter what you do, unless you consider suicide as accomplishing that control. Time is not a dependent variable, but when you decide that t'=g(txv/cc), you are saying time is just such a dependent variable.  But it is only by imagining that time is a dependent variable  that you can add it somehow with space  that allows SR to imagine its transforms are rotations and not translations. Imagine x as the verticle axis on your graph, time as the horizontal axis. If x'=gxgvt is just moving the xaxis to the right, more and more as time goes by, then the transformation is just a shift in the axis with no implication that x (space) and time are the same stuff. If x'=gxgvt is a rotation, as SR says, then the graphical equivalent is to tilt the xaxis somewhat toward the horizontal, somehow becoming part time and part space. User Contributions:Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic:Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 6. The time increases as distance decreases absurdity. Next Document: 8. The data scale degradation absurdity. Single Page [ Usenet FAQs  Web FAQs  Documents  RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: Thnktank@concentric.net (Eleaticus)
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
