In relativity, space and time are treated symmetrically,
as shown in the Minkowski diagram.  The gamma factor
cuts both ways, and everything cancels.

However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la
Einstein, we see that the relativity of time gets
primacy.  Then length contraction follows, considering
the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the
endpoints of a moving rod.  Space becomes a junior
partner, so to speak.

I wonder if we can re-formulate the theory, such that
relativity of length is derived first.  Then the problem
of measuring the endpoints of a time interval on a
moving clock, results in non-simultaneity.

--
Rich

RichD wrote:

> However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la Einstein, we see that
> the relativity of time gets primacy.  Then length contraction follows,
> considering the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the endpoints of a
> moving rod.  Space becomes a junior partner, so to speak.

crazy like shit. Mozilla partnering with WEF, claus schwab (anal) world
"economic" forum, side by side with the pharmakia toxic injection
manufacturers.

https://www.weforum.org/partners#M

Vito Barbosa wrote:

> RichD wrote:
>
>> However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la Einstein, we see that
>> the relativity of time gets primacy.  Then length contraction follows,
>> considering the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the endpoints of
>> a moving rod.  Space becomes a junior partner, so to speak.
>
> crazy like shit. Mozilla partnering with WEF, claus schwab (anal) world
> "economic" forum, side by side with the pharmakia toxic injection
> manufacturers.
>
> https://www.weforum.org/partners#M

M
Maekyung Media Group
Mahindra Group
Majid Al Futtaim
*Manchester United*
*ManpowerGroup*
Manulife
Mari Petroleum
Marsh McLennan
Martin Dow
Mary Kay
*Mastercard*
Mayo Clinic
McKinsey & Company
Medtronic
Mengniu Group
*Merck*
Mercuria Energy Group
Meridiam
Meridian
Micron Technology
*Microsoft*
Midea Group
Midis Group
Millicom
MIND ID
MiSK
*Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings*
Mitsubishi Corporation
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
Mitsui & Co.
Mitsui Chemicals
Mizuho Financial Group
Mjalli Investment Group
MKS (Switzerland)
*Moderna*
Moelis & Company
Monaco Economic Board
Morgan Stanley
Mori Building Co.
Motive Partners
Mott MacDonald
*Mozilla*
MSD
MTN Group
MTR
Mubadala
MUFG Bank
Myan Shwe Pyi Tractors (MSP CAT)

Il giorno sabato 19 giugno 2021 alle 19:08:43 UTC+2 RichD ha scritto:
> In relativity, space and time are treated symmetrically,
> as shown in the Minkowski diagram. The gamma factor
> cuts both ways, and everything cancels.
>
> However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la
> Einstein, we see that the relativity of time gets
> primacy. Then length contraction follows, considering
> the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the
> endpoints of a moving rod. Space becomes a junior
> partner, so to speak.
>
> I wonder if we can re-formulate the theory, such that
> relativity of length is derived first. Then the problem
> of measuring the endpoints of a time interval on a
> moving clock, results in non-simultaneity.
>
> --
> Rich
beda
the contraction of length comes objectively first :
if the moving ruler didn't contract exactly as L=Lo* sqrt(1-v^2)
the two ways travel time of a pulse of light would not be invariant
at all possible inertial speeds of the ruler.
ponder the fact that a ruler is a physical object, the time is not,
so the modification of the object can modify the duration
of a phenomenon not the reverse.
cheers
beda

Op 19-jun.-2021 om 19:08 schreef RichD:
> In relativity, space and time are treated symmetrically,
> as shown in the Minkowski diagram.  The gamma factor
> cuts both ways, and everything cancels.
>
> However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la
> Einstein, we see that the relativity of time gets
> primacy.  Then length contraction follows, considering
> the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the
> endpoints of a moving rod.  Space becomes a junior
> partner, so to speak.
>
> I wonder if we can re-formulate the theory, such that
> relativity of length is derived first.  Then the problem
> of measuring the endpoints of a time interval on a
> moving clock, results in non-simultaneity.

The Lorentz transformation can be derived from the postulates?
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivations_of_the_Lorentz_transformations
which includes many direct derivations, including Einstein's.
Length contraction trivially follows from the transformation.

Dirk Vdm

Op 19-jun.-2021 om 23:13 schreef Dirk Van de moortel:
> Op 19-jun.-2021 om 19:08 schreef RichD:
>> In relativity, space and time are treated symmetrically,
>> as shown in the Minkowski diagram.  The gamma factor
>> cuts both ways, and everything cancels.
>>
>> However, if we examine the usual derivation, a la
>> Einstein, we see that the relativity of time gets
>> primacy.  Then length contraction follows, considering
>> the conundrum of simultaneously measuring the
>> endpoints of a moving rod.  Space becomes a junior
>> partner, so to speak.
>>
>> I wonder if we can re-formulate the theory, such that
>> relativity of length is derived first.  Then the problem
>> of measuring the endpoints of a time interval on a
>> moving clock, results in non-simultaneity.
>
> The Lorentz transformation can be derived from the postulates?

Typo. That question mark should be colon or a full stop.

Dirk Vdm

> See
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivations_of_the_Lorentz_transformations
> which includes many direct derivations, including Einstein's.
> Length contraction trivially follows from the transformation.
>
> Dirk Vdm

On Saturday, June 19, 2021 at 10:08:43 AM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> In relativity, space and time are treated symmetrically,
> as shown in the Minkowski diagram. The gamma factor

That is not real. But they do exist together with space aether first...
Space has an absolute and expanding size. Time slow can speed back
up. Fast in space is slow in space time.

If you accelerate you can decelerate on your world line...
Rotation can at the right place begin its accelerate and
end in its deceleration.

Mitchell Raemsch

On 6/19/21 12:08 PM, RichD wrote:
> [...]

The modern derivation of the Lorentz transform uses the PoR, group
theory, and the definition of inertial frames. One immediately finds
there are just three transformation groups that meet the requirements:
the Galilei group, the Euclid group (4-D), and the Lorentz group. Only
the last agrees with experiments. "Relativity of time, space, length,
etc." never enter into the derivation at all. The distinction between
space and time comes from the definition of inertial frames -- space is
isotropic and homogeneous, while time is just homogeneous.

Tom Roberts

On Thursday, 24 June 2021 at 19:34:51 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote:
> On 6/19/21 12:08 PM, RichD wrote:
> > [...]
>
> The modern derivation of the Lorentz transform uses the PoR, group
> theory, and the definition of inertial frames. One immediately finds
> there are just three transformation groups that meet the requirements:
> the Galilei group, the Euclid group (4-D), and the Lorentz group. Only
> the last agrees with experiments.

A lie, as expected from relativistic scum. Anyone can check
GPS, serious clocks made by serious measurement specialists
keep indicating t'=t, just like they always do. Your moronic
screams that we're FORCED to make clocks THE BEST
WAY of your idiot guru - didn't work at all. Sorry.

On Thursday, June 24, 2021 at 10:44:11 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 June 2021 at 19:34:51 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote:
> > On 6/19/21 12:08 PM, RichD wrote:
> > > [...]
> >
> > The modern derivation of the Lorentz transform uses the PoR, group
> > theory, and the definition of inertial frames. One immediately finds
> > there are just three transformation groups that meet the requirements:
> > the Galilei group, the Euclid group (4-D), and the Lorentz group. Only
> > the last agrees with experiments.
> A lie, as expected from relativistic scum. Anyone can check
> GPS, serious clocks made by serious measurement specialists
> keep indicating t'=t, just like they always do. Your moronic
> screams that we're FORCED to make clocks THE BEST
> WAY of your idiot guru - didn't work at all. Sorry.

Time is at every point of the space field...

Mitchell Raemsch