Re: Albert in Relativityland

Le 03/04/2025 à 11:04, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

Den 02.04.2025 20:25, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Can you give another interpretation of the facts than "time dilation"?

The problem of time dilation will remain a real problem of understanding as long as theoretical physics remains a fog of words and abstract or misunderstood concepts.
According to the great Dr. Hachel, one of the most influential ideas in modern physics, a three-time Nobel Prize winner and future Fields Medalist for his work on complex numbers and imaginary functions, there is no real time dilation. An absurd concept.
If a particle were to live for 65.55 nanoseconds, for example, it would live for 65.55 nanoseconds in all the frames of reference in which it finds itself, being at rest in that frame of reference, and all frames of reference being equivalent in the notion of rest.
We must therefore abandon the term "time dilation," which is doubly false, in favor of "chronotropy dilation." That is to say, the particle's lifetime won't change, whether it's at rest or moving at 0.9995c.
What will change is the measurement I'll have of it in MY frame of reference compared to its own.
But if time doesn't change. If it always lives for 65.55 nanoseconds in all frames of reference (including accelerated or rotating frames), why aren't I measuring the same thing?
Two problems will then arise: First, the particle isn't, for me, in the same place when it leaves and when it arrives. If I assert a first-degree relativistic anisochrony between the two places, and if I add to this a dilation of the chronotropy due to the relative speed between it and the laboratory, we understand that the measurements will seem strange.
The particle's actual speed will seem much slower than it actually is; I'll only be measuring an observable speed.
I'll therefore have to correct this speed that I observe and measure (Vo: observable speed) into the notion of real speed (Vr).
Vr=Vo/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²).
Everything is finally back in order.
The particle only lived for 65.55 nanoseconds. It's my ignorance of the concept of chronotropy dilation, spatial anisochrony, and especially the concept of real speed relative to what is measured, that misleads me into thinking that the particle actually lived longer in one frame of reference than in another.
R.H.