<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Stoat</i>
<br />If the "speed" of gravity is vastly greater than the speed of light, then the whole non simultaneity becomes moot. An electron here and an electron on Vega say, are gravitationally, informationally, right up cheek by jowl with each other. The e.m information takes years to arrive.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I think I may have miscommunicated my thread to which I owe a correcion. Butt first a comment on your post. As a simple eample, the discovery of Neptune was relatred to poerturbations in Uranus' trajectory. Similarly, Pluto was discovered from perturbations in Neptunes orbit. The discovered perturbations, in other words, were limited to the distances between affected planets. The solar system is a microcosmic representatation of the concept that the force of gravity, already the weakest of all possible natural forces, must be limited in its effect by distance. I would be very surprised to discover your two electrons 'cheek to jowl' in any context of gravitational forces.
In any event, this thread started out very ugly, but I have since clarified the issues and cut some of the wordy fluff away. This system described here is able to determine the velocity of an inertial frame, regardless of various physical postulates having forbidden such an enterprise. The measurement is trivially simple.
Determine the velocity of an inertial frame using only three recorded time-of-flight events of a single light pulse.
***
WARNING IF YOU POST ANOTHER LINK LIKE THIS YOU WILL BE ASKED TO LEAVE
[moderator LB]
***
From the schematic of the system in Figure 1 measuring the velocity of the inertial frame A is clearly a very simple system. The A frame velocity is determined by a measurement of the distance a pulse of light travels in specific recorded time events. There are only three of these events: 1. the time the pulse was emitted from the A frame at t0, 2. the time the pulse arrived back at the A frame after reflection from the inertial frame transponder, Tp, at t1 and, 3. The arrival back at the A frames of the light pulse re-emitted at t1.
The distance difference, (d1 + d2) - (d3 + d4) is the distance the frame traveled during the total time-of-flight traveled by the light pulse. Picture the frame moving in the direction of the pulse moving away until the distance (d1 + d2) was traveled (project a straight line without the reflection). Attaching the final pulse trajectory to the end of the (d1 + d2) and heading toward the oncoming A frame, the collision of the pulse and the A frame determines the total distance traveled by the pulse and t2 duly notes this event.
The data base of experimental data is contained in the three time events, t0, t1, and t2. Expressing the dn in time and speed parameters with unit speed of light c = 1, then
(d1 + d2) - (d3 + d4) = [(t1 #8722; t0) #8722; (t2 #8722; t1)] = Va(t2 #8722; t0) or,
VA(t2 #8722; t0) = 2t1 #8722; (t2 + t0) hence,
VA = [2t1 #8722; (t2 + t0)]/(t2 #8722; t0) (1)
QED.
There is no referenced inertial frame to which the A frame VA is measured, or needs to be measured from and there is no absolute velocity reference frame where Vf = 0. Remember, the Va was not determined by a stop watch and meter stick. The Va is a calculated term using the known speed of light, the time-of-flight of pulse trajectory segments, and the definition of velocity. Can the origin of the light pulse be located and returned to? Yes, but there should be a valid reason for such a future activity sentimental reasons ought not to be consider a valid reason. If the Va becomes suspect, measure the velocity again, or simply maintain a constant velocity calculation and updating of the frame velocity for all tn.
V = (Xn+1 Xn)/(tn+1 tn). (2)
The question then is, does this measurement of velocity constitute a condition anticipated by the postulate of SRT that states,
It is impossible to measure or detect unaccelerated translatory motion in free space.?
Mikey
