Usually, it is considered that, in the relativistic physics the speed is relative, there can be no biger speed than the speed of light, and the speed of light in vacuum does not depend on the observer's velocity.
The speed of light is real, not only subjective or phenomenal. We can measure the mean speed of an object as a ratio between the magnitude of the spatial trajectory that it traveled and the magnitude of time in which it traveled that trajectory. However, any measuring, either of a spatial or temporal quantity, is relative to an unity (eg., meter, second etc.). Any motion has a speed. The measuring of speed is relative to some unities, distances, and others means (eg., light) and tools for measuring, but the reality or the existence of the speed, as that of motion, is not only subjective. That is, the motion and the speed exist in theirselves. That is, our perception of the speed can be conditioned and affected by distances, therefore position, and other means and tools which we use for measuring, but the motion and the speed exist in theirselves.
Suppose the following imaginary situation: i) two objects (a man and a photon) move, each one towards the other one, along a stright line with an uniform, constant speed.
ii) the man saw the photon moving towards him, but he was not knowing that he also was moving towards the photon.
iii) the man measured the speed of photon relative to him, and found that it has had the usual magnitude of the speed of light.
What can we conclude from the fact that the man does not measured a biger speed than the speed of light?
That there is no biger speed than the speed of light? What can we conclude rationally? Rationally, in the previous conditions, neccessarily he would have had to measure a biger speed than the speed of light. This does not mean that the photon has had a biger speed than the speed of light, but only that he neccessarily would have had to measure a biger speed than the speed of light, if his measuring system and perceptual system would have been proper...
Rational Conclusion: its measuring and/or perception and/or was/were not perfect.
Suppose the following partial new conditions:
i) two objects (a man and a photon) had begun to move along a stright line with constant, but different, speeds, biger than 0, from the same place, in the same time, and in the same sense.
ii) the man measured the speed of light relative to its position, without to know that he also was moving, and found that it had the usual magnitude of the speed of light.
What can we conclude rationally about the man's measuring, relativelly to this conditions? Rationally, consider we, if c and v are biger than 0, but different, then (c-v=0) cannot be truth.
Rational Conclusion: The measuring and/or perception and/or interpretation was/were inaccurate and/or incorrect, imperfects.
The previous conditions, as premises, are not suficient to conclude that there can be no biger speed than the speed of light.
Though the mans' measurings were erroneous, their results were true, if their movements do not affected the speed of light.
The real mean speed of a moving object is not a ratio between the appearant, illusory distance that it traveled and the time, but a ratio between the real distance that it traveled and the time.
Every measurement is by some units (eg., meter, seconds etc.), but the mean speed is not relative to the traveled distance and traveling's time, but is the ratio between the traveled distance and the traveling's time.
danila ioan marian
17-11-2004
BEYOUND THE PERCEPTUAL RELATIVITY OR TOWARD TRUTH
In one and the same state, outside of changing, the universe cannot have and to not to have one and the same property.
In one and the same state, outside of changing, the universe cannot have and to not to have the same properties.
When the universe is in being, it cannot not to be in being.
Pentru a descărca acest document,
trebuie să te autentifici in contul tău.
