scholarly journals The Constitution Of Special Relativity

2018 ◽  
pp. 3518-3523
Author(s):  
Tapan Kumar Ghosh
Keyword(s):  
Special Relativity ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Spherical Wave ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Single Treatment ◽  
System Of Units ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
Time Standards ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Time Standard

Lorentz transformation relations of special relativity are generally derived for light like intervals in almost all texts. The procedure assumes invariance of spherical wave front equation in all inertial frames. This paper deals with the derivation of the transformation relations of event coordinates together with Doppler formula from a single treatment by constructing identical length and time standard under identical conditions in compared frames. To meet this end critical review of the postulates of Special Relativity in the perspective of equivalence of length, time and mass standard followed by the meaning of phase of clock in any inertial frame is presented. It has been shown that special relativity is in reality a supreme creation of human mind where identical length and time standards being  independent of the perspective  are not naturally given but had been constructed under identical experimental condition in a scientific way so that observations from different frames can be compared using same system of units.

scholarly journals Special Relativity sans Lorentz Transformation (OR) Perceptional Relativity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEBASTIN PATRICK ASOKAN
Keyword(s):  
Special Relativity ◽  
Lorentz Transformation ◽  
Fast Moving ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Special Theory ◽  
Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Special Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Speed Of Light ◽  
Slowing Down ◽  
Inertial Frames

Abstract This paper shows that from the fact that the same Reality is perceived differently by the observers in different inertial frames, we can draw a simple and straightforward explanation for the constancy of light's speed in all inertial frames without any need for bringing in paradoxical Lorentz Transformation. This paper shows that the premise that each inertial frame has its unique time, which Lorentz Transformation introduced to explain the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames is incompatible with the interchangeability of the frames, an essential requisite of the First Postulate of the Special Theory of Relativity. This paper also points out the misconceptions regarding the claimed experimental verifications of Lorentz Transformation's predictions in the Hafele–Keating experiment and μ meson experiment. This paper hints at the possibility of attributing the observed slowing down of fast-moving clocks to the Relativistic Variation of Mass with Velocity instead of Time Dilation. This paper concludes that Einstein's Special Theory Relativity can stand on its own merits without Lorentz Transformation.

Einstein’s special relativity violates the constancy of the velocity c of light under one-way conditions and thus contradicts the behavior of electromagnetic radiation

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-278
Author(s):  
Reiner Georg Ziefle
Keyword(s):  
Electromagnetic Radiation ◽  
Coordinate System ◽  
Special Relativity ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Length Contraction ◽  
Relativistic Time ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
General Relativistic

On Earth, we always measure the constant velocity c of electromagnetic radiation. Einstein assumed the velocity c of light to be constant in all inertial frames and developed his theory of special relativity by considering a light beam that moves back and forth, whereby he derived transformations between the coordinates of two reference frames: A moving reference frame represented by the coordinate system k and the coordinate system k that is at rest with respect to k. However, by applying Einstein’s theory of relativity, with its postulates of relativistic time dilation and length contraction, to electromagnetic radiation that moves only in one direction, either in the direction of or in the opposite direction to a moving inertial frame, it is demonstrated that the constancy of the velocity c of light is not compatible with Einstein’s theory of special relativity. It becomes obvious that Einstein’s relativistic physics must be an unrealistic theory, and consequently, we need an alternative, nonrelativistic, explanation of the constancy of the velocity c of electromagnetic radiation measured on Earth, and for the special and general “relativistic” phenomena.

Ultracold atoms and precise time standards

2011 ◽  
Vol 369 (1953) ◽  
pp. 4078-4089 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gretchen K. Campbell ◽  
William D. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Laser Cooling ◽  
International System ◽  
Microwave Frequency ◽  
Observation Time ◽  
Mass Motion ◽  
Frequency Standards ◽  
Systematic Uncertainties ◽  
System Of Units ◽  
Time Standards ◽  
Atomic Frequency

Experimental techniques of laser cooling and trapping, along with other cooling techniques, have produced gaseous samples of atoms so cold that they are, for many practical purposes, in the quantum ground state of their centre-of-mass motion. Such low velocities have virtually eliminated effects such as Doppler shifts, relativistic time dilation and observation-time broadening that previously limited the performance of atomic frequency standards. Today, the best laser-cooled, caesium atomic fountain, microwave frequency standards realize the International System of Units (SI) definition of the second to a relative accuracy of ≈3×10 −16 . Optical frequency standards, which do not realize the SI second, have even better performance: cold neutral atoms trapped in optical lattices now yield relative systematic uncertainties of ≈1×10 −16 , whereas cold-trapped ions have systematic uncertainties of 9×10 −18 . We will discuss the current limitations in the performance of neutral atom atomic frequency standards and prospects for the future.

scholarly journals Special Relativity sans Lorentz Transformation (OR) Perceptional Relativity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastin Patrick Asokan
Keyword(s):  
Special Relativity ◽  
Lorentz Transformation ◽  
Special Theory ◽  
Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Special Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Speed Of Light ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
Impossible Task

Abstract This paper shows that from the fact that the same Reality is perceived differently by the observers in different inertial frames, we can draw a simple and straightforward explanation for the constancy of light's speed in all inertial frames without any need for bringing in paradoxical Lorentz Transformation. This paper also proves that Lorentz Transformation has failed in its attempt to do the impossible task of establishing t' ≠ t to explain the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames without contradicting the interchangeability of frames demanded by the First Postulate of the Special Theory of Relativity. This paper also points out the misconceptions regarding the claimed experimental verifications of Lorentz Transformation's predictions in the Hafele–Keating experiment and μ meson experiment. This paper concludes that Einstein's Special Theory Relativity can stand on its own merits without Lorentz Transformation.

scholarly journals Relativistic Reference Frames in Astrometry

1986 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 101-102
Author(s):  
C A Murray
Keyword(s):  
Coordinate System ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Space Time ◽  
Clock Time ◽  
Local Inertial Frame ◽  
Incoming Photon ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
Spatial Coordinates

Astrometry can be defined as the measurement of space-time coordinates of photon events. For example, in principle, in classical optical astrometry, we measure the components of velocity, and hence the direction, of an incoming photon with respect to an instrumental coordinate system, and the clock time, at the instant of detection. The observer’s coordinate system at any instant can be identified with a local inertial frame. In the case of interferometric observations, the measurements are of clock times of arrival of a wavefront at two detectors whose spatial coordinates are specified with respect to instantaneous inertial frames.

scholarly journals Validation of quantum adiabaticity through non-inertial frames and its trapped-ion realization

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chang-Kang Hu ◽  
Jin-Ming Cui ◽  
Alan C. Santos ◽  
Yun-Feng Huang ◽  
Chuan-Feng Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Dynamics ◽  
Adiabatic Approximation ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Quantum Systems ◽  
Resonance Phenomenon ◽  
Quantum Evolution ◽  
Adiabatic Condition ◽  
Quantum Bit ◽  
Adiabatic Conditions ◽  
Inertial Frames

AbstractValidity conditions for the adiabatic approximation are useful tools to understand and predict the quantum dynamics. Remarkably, the resonance phenomenon in oscillating quantum systems has challenged the adiabatic theorem. In this scenario, inconsistencies in the application of quantitative adiabatic conditions have led to a sequence of new approaches for adiabaticity. Here, by adopting a different strategy, we introduce a validation mechanism for the adiabatic approximation by driving the quantum system to a non-inertial reference frame. More specifically, we begin by considering several relevant adiabatic approximation conditions previously derived and show that all of them fail by introducing a suitable oscillating Hamiltonian for a single quantum bit (qubit). Then, by evaluating the adiabatic condition in a rotated non-inertial frame, we show that all of these conditions, including the standard adiabatic condition, can correctly describe the adiabatic dynamics in the original frame, either far from resonance or at a resonant point. Moreover, we prove that this validation mechanism can be extended for general multi-particle quantum systems, establishing the conditions for the equivalence of the adiabatic behavior as described in inertial or non-inertial frames. In order to experimentally investigate our method, we consider a hyperfine qubit through a single trapped Ytterbium ion 171Yb+, where the ion hyperfine energy levels are used as degrees of freedom of a two-level system. By monitoring the quantum evolution, we explicitly show the consistency of the adiabatic conditions in the non-inertial frame.

Thomas–Wigner rotation and Thomas precession in covariant ether theories: novel approach to experimental verification of special relativity

2015 ◽  
Vol 93 (5) ◽  
pp. 503-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander L. Kholmetskii ◽  
Tolga Yarman
Keyword(s):  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Empty Space ◽  
Special Theory ◽  
Theory Of Relativity ◽  
Thomas Precession ◽  
Wigner Rotation ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
Crucial Test ◽  
Ether Theories

We continue the analysis of Thomas–Wigner rotation (TWR) and Thomas precession (TP) initiated in (Kholmetskii and Yarman. Can. J. Phys. 92, 1232 (2014). doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0015 ; Kholmetskii et al. Can. J. Phys. 92, 1380 (2014). doi:10.1139/cjp-2014-0140 ), where a number of points of serious inconsistency have been found in the relativistic explanation of these effects. These findings motivated us to address covariant ether theories (CET), as suggested by the first author (Kholmetskii. Phys. Scr. 67, 381 (2003)) and to show that both TWR and TP find a perfect explanation in CET. We briefly reproduce the main points of CET, which are constructed on the basis of general symmetries of empty space–time, general relativity principles, and classical causality, instead of Einstein’s postulates of the special theory of relativity (STR). We demonstrate that with respect to all known relativistic experiments performed to date in all areas of physics, both theories, STR and CET, yield identical results. We further show that the only effect that differentiates STR and CET is the measurement of time-dependent TWR of two inertial frames, K1 and K2, related by the rotation-free Lorentz transformation with a third inertial frame, K0, in the situation, where the relative velocity between K1 and K2 remains fixed. We discuss the results obtained and suggest a novel experiment, which can be classified as a new crucial test of STR.

Comment on: Curling rock dynamics - The motion of a curling rock: inertial vs. noninertial reference frames

2000 ◽  
Vol 77 (11) ◽  
pp. 903-922 ◽  
Author(s):  
MRA Shegelski ◽  
M Reid
Keyword(s):  
Smooth Surface ◽  
Reference Frames ◽  
Inertial Frame ◽  
Center Of Mass ◽  
Rotating Cylinder ◽  
Lateral Motion ◽  
Noninertial Frame ◽  
Nonzero Component ◽  
Inertial Frames ◽  
Left Right Asymmetry

We examine the approach used and the results presented in a recent publication(Can. J. Phys. 76, 295 (1998))in which (i) a noninertial reference frame is used to examine the motion ofa curling rock, and (ii) the lateral motion of a curling rock isattributed to left-right asymmetry in the force acting on the rock.We point out the important differences between describing the motionin an inertial frame as opposed to a noninertial frame.We show that a force exhibiting left-right asymmetryin an inertial frame cannot explain the lateral motion of a curlingrock. We also examine, as was apparently done in the recent publication,an effective force that has left-right asymmetry in a noninertial, rotating frame. We show that such a force is not left-right asymmetric in an inertial frame, and that anylateral motion of a curling rock attributed to the effective forcein the noninertial frame is actually due to a real force, in aninertial frame, which has a net nonzero component transverse to the velocityof the center of mass. We inquire as to the physical basis for thetransverse component of this real force. We also examine the motion ofa rotating cylinder sliding over a smooth surface for which there isno melting: we show that the motion is easily analyzed in an inertialframe and that there is little to be gained by considering a rotating frame.We relate the results for this simple case to the more involved problemof the motion of a curling rock: we find that the motion of curling rocksis best studied in inertial frames. Perhaps most importantly, we showthat the approach taken and the results presented in the recent publicationlead to predicted motions of curling rocks that are indisagreement with observed motions of real curling rocks.PACS Nos.: 46.00, 01.80+b

scholarly journals Improvement of the method for standardizing the duration of rail cars shunting

2021 ◽  
pp. 158-164
Author(s):  
D.M Kozachenko ◽  
B.V Gera ◽  
E.K Manafov ◽  
A.V Gorbova ◽  
R.G Korobyova
Keyword(s):  
Piecewise Linear ◽  
Setting Time ◽  
Piecewise Linear Function ◽  
Operating Conditions ◽  
Optimal Order ◽  
Railway Stations ◽  
Industrial Enterprises ◽  
Time Standards ◽  
Railway Operation ◽  
Time Standard

Purpose. To improve the method for calculating the time standard for shunting cars from track to track in order to take into account the local operating conditions of railway stations and railway sidings. Methodology. During the research, the methods of theory of railway operation were used. The problem of calculating the time standard for shunting operation was solved as the problem of searching the optimal division of train set into the car groups to achieve minimal time consumption for shunting operation. Findings. In the course of the study, the methods for calculating the time standards for initial and final operations, as well as movements performed when shunting cars from track to track were improved. It was proved that the minimum time spent on shunting cars from track to track was achieved when the train set was divided into the minimum possible number of parts and the cars were shunted in the longest possible groups and one remaining group. It was also established that with sufficient accuracy for engineering problems the duration of shunting train set from track to track can be represented by the piecewise linear function of the car number in it. Originality. The work originality consists in improving the method for calculating the time standard for shunting cars from track to track, that, unlike the existing one, takes into account the length limitations of the car groups being shunted from track to track, as well as the actual composition of operations performed in the process of shunting. Practical value. The use of the developed method allows setting time standards for shunting cars from track to track, taking into account the local operating conditions of railway stations and sidings of industrial enterprises. The method also makes it possible to simplify solving problems of searching the optimal order of performing more complex shunting operations, such as sorting cars into several tracks, collecting cars on one track, train formation, and others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document