On May 1, 11:17 am,xxein<xxe...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Apr 30, 7:18 pm,
chaosfilter....@gmail.com wrote:
i'm just starting study in special relativity in an undergrad course.
i can't quite figure this one out.
if i someone (A) is hurtling at a constant velocity of -0.75c toward
me, and from the other direction someone else (A') is hurtling at a
constant velocity of 0.75 toward me. What is the velocity of A' from
the reference frame of A?
thanks in advance for any help on this
cf
xxein: You will quickly come up to velocity addition in your studies
(if you haven't yet). If you have and are still going nuts over this,
you can use logic and make a logical physics. But in order to do so,
you will have to be very intelligent. You will also need seasoning
(never enough).
I can't tell you how you will or should reason, but I can give you a
logic to understand this problem and solve it for a greater
satisfaction beyond the toutology you may encounter.
I should not give you a direct answer to your question because it may
allow you to give an answer to a test, but I will do so anyway. It is
-0.96c. I do so because I don't want you to fail a test and give it
all up.
You seem to be interested in physics-relativity (perhaps only in
general) and you are going to be taught a lot of things that won't
seem to make sense. You will be taught formulae and relations that
that seem to come out of nowhere. Well? It's true. It comes from
nowhere, but it seems to work.
It can only work because it does and you might be satisfied with
that. But if you think as I do, it lacks logic in many ways ---
bigtime. There is a major problem here in that that the logic we use
comes, not as a whole, but in separate packets. Cosmology does not
give rise to relativity (except through c). SR-GR does not create a
cosmology (it is baffled by galactic rotation). QM cannot recognise
a gravity. Yet each is taught to be the 'science' you must learn in
order to progress to their level of understanding when they clearly
have none that unites to a logical sense.
So? I may be bursting your bubble. Fair or unfair?
The point here is that something seems to offend your rationality and
logic for velocity addition. I can't blame you. It's not you ---
it's the science that is taught. It is not good enough to satisfy a
logic.
I'll post a reply to myself to give you some insight that you might
find usefull.
no bubble bursting...
i plugged the numbers into the formula listed on the page david posted
below, and got your answer. p.s. wasn't an answer for a test, just my
own query (our text book had relative velocities in the same
direction, or without two being greater than 0.5).
for moi, instrumentally correct in the situations i am concerned with
will do for now
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
