Re: the notion of counter-intuitiveness in relativistic physics

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 14:06:56 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

I was saying, unlike Albert Einstein, that the mathematics of the theory
of relativity is very simple, but that it is full of little traps.
He says the opposite: that it is very difficult, but that there are no
traps.
>
One of the main traps may be the notion of counter-intuitiveness.
>
If we ask someone what will happen if we head towards a star at Vo=0.8c,
or two hundred and forty thousand km/s, if I am 9 light years from this
star, the person who does not know anything about it will first say that
nothing happens at all, that the notion of space is absolute, and that,
at
that moment, I am simply 9 light years from the star.
>
This is the level of a twelve-year-old kid who doesn't understand
anything
about RR, or the level of a 19th-century physicist.
>
But we can notice that a big shot today is not necessarily less stupid,
because a big shot of relativity (let's take the case of Python who
deserves to have his intellectual flaws denounced) will, by
"intuitiveness" say that the space between him and the star will
contract.
>
This obviously seems quite intuitive if we have, like him, what a jerk
this Python is, "a little" learned the theory.
>
But, precisely, it is too intuitive, and the truth will come like a big
slap, because it is terribly counter-intuitive and astonishing (if we
understand the Poincaré transformations correctly).
>
A bit like the children of the islands of South Asia, who are warned to
quickly climb to the heights
if the sea suddenly recedes, and who immediately do not understand why
they must flee, when the sea is going away. Tsunami concept.
>
The correct formula is not the one given by Mr. Einstein, and it is not
D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)
that must be applied, but D'=D.sqrt[(1+Vo/c)/(1-Vo/c)].
>
At this moment, the star is not 9 ly (Newton), nor 5.4 ly (Einstein), it
is much, much much further away (I'll let you calculate, because it's
always good to teach by asking students to UNDERSTAND for themselves,
and
not stupidly recite what Richard Hachel says), and it is heading towards
the rocket with an apparent speed of 4c.
>
That a star appears to move away from me very quickly as I increase my
speed towards it is incredibly counter-intuitive.
>
That's what counter-intuitiveness is.
>
And it can block 120 years of theoretical physics as long as we don't
believe in it.
>
R.H.

Just give it up, it's just not something you can do. Just like I don't
run
around pretending I can play Godowski's Chopin transcriptions. I just
don't do it.
Your biggest problem at this time is that you cannot understand the
explanations
given to you.
--
Jan