Subject: RE: (urth) time dilation terminology Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:39:40 -0700 From: "Dan'l Danehy-Oakes"
Mantis wrote: > Unless you are trying to tell me that there is no time=20 > dilation at relativistic speeds, which would be an=20 > interesting claim,=20 It would, but I'm not. The question then becomes whose speed is relative ... when you say that > "Objective time" =3D t(o) =3D "interval of time experienced by=20 > an observer in the coordinate system (at rest)" which coordinate system are you saying is "at rest?" At rest relative to what? Are you invoking luminiferous aether? Without that, the coordinate system of the _Whorl_ -- except during the boost phases -- is as legitimately "at rest" as that of Urth; or, taking your other (verbal) reference frame, > "Subjective time" =3D t =3D "time recorded by a clock moving in=20 > the rocket at a constant velocity V across space" there's no "space" for it to be moving "at a constant velocity across" -- once boost stops, it's moving along its natural worldline away, which happens to be at a more or less constant velocity relative to the Urth system ... but it's quite as legitimate (though generally less=20 convenient) to declare that Urth is moving away from the=20 _Whorl_. --Blattid --