Quote:
|
Originally Posted by humility
Just one question I have got . ...
Well if there is a speed limit to the universe in relativity.
[1]Why do we just decide that there can't be a ultimate reference of rest.
[1a]Standard interpretation of relativity says that there is no ultimate reference of rest and therefore every observer can consider themselves at rest relative to C.
[2]If the value C is mathematically derived why can't there be a ultimate frame of rest which is the inverse of what you used to work out ultimate velocity.
|
I count two questions and one clarification.
1) I am a bit confused of the phrase "ultimate reference of rest". I think though your
assumption is based on the notion by Newton of Absolute Time for all observers as
constant. Also all observers would have the same measurement stick for along the path
traveled. Call this rods and clock (like Einstein). For Newton all rods and clocks were the
same. Once could derived the Absolute rest coordinate frame once all relative motion
was accounted for. In Relativity this is not so. Each clock and rod is wrt to the observer
and his respective motion to what is observed.
1a) This a different way to look at it. I will have to think about this. My first thought was
to discount it. I still find it "fishy" though, I like the innovation.
2) Yes, you can mathematically derive C from Mawell's equations to be
==> c = sqrt (1/ mu0 * ep0) where mu0 = magnetic permeability and
ep0 = electric permittivity of the EM field. You reask question [1] => answer 1).
Maddog
