+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Chemistry, Physics & Mathematics (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-77.html)
+--- Thread: SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook (/thread-6283.html)
SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook - confused2 - Oct 14, 2018
Really a test to see if anyone is interested in relativity
The question comes from:-
http://www.modernrelativitysite.com/chap1.htm by David Waite
[b]At least two of us on the forum have 'threaded' with him and know him to be extremely helpful but I (at least) wouldn't want to waste his time if nobody (including myself) is prepared to have a go at a single exercise.
A link to the answer is given so we can cheat. Hopefully anyone interested in SR could will report along the lines of:-[/b]
Too easy
.Success
Success but cheated
Failed and gave up
.Failed and cheated and still couldn't suss it
. <- this still counts as an honorable failDid it but the dog ate my ipad
.Hello mum
.Let the testing commence...
Problem 1.1.1. Consider a signal sent along an x, x' axis sent at t = 0, where S' moves relative to the S in the + x direction with speed v. If the speed of the signal is the same speed c according to either frame, and assuming the coordinate transformation between the two takes the form
t= at' + bx'
x = ex' + ft'
y = y'
z = z'
RE: SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook - Secular Sanity - Oct 14, 2018
Failed, cheated, and still can’t do it.
I can follow along in a video but that’s about it.
Can we toss in --> above my paid grade?
RE: SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook - confused2 - Oct 14, 2018
I can follow his answer line by line but these aren't techniques I could (or would) ever use without being lead by the nose.
So I also return
Cheated and failed.
RE: SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook - Secular Sanity - Oct 15, 2018
(Oct 14, 2018 07:52 PM)confused2 Wrote: I can follow his answer line by line but these aren't techniques I could (or would) ever use without being lead by the nose.
So I also return
Cheated and failed.
Everyone knows that Sal from Kahn academy does a good job of working through them and his voice is easy on the ears. Another good one is Professor Shankar from Yale’s open courses, and like everyone else, I used to love Walter Lewin’s lectures. Did you know that he was accused of sexual harassment? I think they had evidence though his emails. MIT stripped him of his Professor Emeritus status, and they removed his video lectures, but they’re still available on YouTube and several other places.
http://news.mit.edu/2014/lewin-courses-removed-1208
RE: SR Problem 1.1.1 from an Internet textbook - confused2 - Oct 23, 2018
Probably best to derive time dilation and length contraction from first principles first, that said...
Wiki offers a neat derivation of the Lorentz Transform which looks like it just involves fiddling about with a pencil and paper to sort out the meaning of their OM = OO′ + O′M.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivations_of_the_Lorentz_transformations#Time_dilation_and_length_contraction