If SR Wrong: Difficulties, Paradoxes, Instantaneous Signals

  • Thread starter Ratzinger
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sr
In summary, if SR were wrong, we would run into difficulties and paradoxes. Such a universe would look different than what we expect based on the principles of relativity.
  • #1
Ratzinger
291
0
If SR were wrong, in what kind of difficulties and paradoxes would we run? What would an universe with instantaneous signals look like? Is such universe even possible?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It might look how pre-relativistic mechanics says it would look.
 
  • #3
Ratzinger said:
If SR were wrong, in what kind of difficulties and paradoxes would we run? What would an universe with instantaneous signals look like? Is such universe even possible?

thanks

You would have a continuous patchwork of kludges added in order to make things fit. The first kludge would be to fix things in such a way so that Maxwell equations would look invariant when viewed from relatively moving inertial frames. And it gets nastier from there...
 
  • #4
Some of the interpretations that depend upon c as the limiting speed limit may not have any effect on the way things work - for example we know that em waves travel at c, we think electostatic and gravitational effects are also similarly limited - but we don't have very good ways to verify the speed at which fields produce forces at a distance. So if by some chance these field effects travel at some other speed than c, then the universe will behave as it does, but not for the reason we think it does
 
  • #5
Ratzinger said:
If SR were wrong, in what kind of difficulties and paradoxes would we run? What would an universe with instantaneous signals look like? Is such universe even possible?

thanks


Be more specific. Do you mean if the principles SR is based on are wrong, namely the constancy of the speed of light for all inertial observers, and the principle of relativity? Or do you mean the conclusions derived from those?

It depends on what part is wrong. If you mean the second and not the first, well then our entire system of mathematics doesn't apply to the universe as a descriptive tool. And if you mean that light is not the same to all observers, but the principle of relativity still holds, then we get pre-relativistic mechanics. If you say light is constant, but the laws of physics are not the same in all inertial frames, or both are wrong, then really weird things happen.
 
  • #6
Ratzinger said:
If SR were wrong, in what kind of difficulties and paradoxes would we run? What would an universe with instantaneous signals look like? Is such universe even possible?

thanks

If realtivity were wrong, the universe would be the same as it is now. Except it would have more red faces.
 
  • #7
Be more specific.

I mean pre-relavistic mechanics (and pre-Maxwell). No constancy of light, Galilean relativity apply in this universe, you can travel as fast as you like.

Is causality violated in a Galilean universe?
 
  • #8
We would have serious trouble making our synchrotrons work.
 
  • #9
wisp said:
If realtivity were wrong, the universe would be the same as it is now. Except it would have more red faces.

Not really. Most of us would have been DEAD, including you, because the stuff we depend our lives on would have caused major crashes or wrong medical diagnosis.

Zz.
 
  • #10
Ratzinger said:
Is causality violated in a Galilean universe?

No, because there is absolute time and absolute similtaneity.

Regards,
George
 
  • #11
Is there still time to retreat my question? It looks fairly dumb now to me .
 

Related to If SR Wrong: Difficulties, Paradoxes, Instantaneous Signals

1. What are some difficulties associated with the theory of special relativity?

Some difficulties include the concept of time dilation, the relativity of simultaneity, and the twin paradox. Time dilation refers to the fact that time appears to move slower for objects moving at high speeds. The relativity of simultaneity means that two events that occur simultaneously for one observer may not occur simultaneously for another. The twin paradox is a thought experiment where one twin travels at high speeds while the other stays on Earth, causing them to age at different rates.

2. What paradoxes arise from special relativity?

Some paradoxes include the ladder paradox, the Ehrenfest paradox, and the Bell's spaceship paradox. The ladder paradox involves a ladder moving at high speeds and appearing to contract in length, leading to a paradox where the ladder may not be able to fit through a smaller space. The Ehrenfest paradox involves a rotating disk and the concept of length contraction, leading to a paradox where the circumference of the disk appears to be shorter than the radius. Bell's spaceship paradox involves two spaceships moving at high speeds and appears to violate the principle of relativity.

3. How does special relativity account for the speed of light being constant?

Special relativity states that the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference. This means that no matter how fast an observer is moving, they will always measure the speed of light to be approximately 299,792,458 meters per second. This is due to the fact that the laws of physics, including the speed of light, are the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion.

4. What challenges does the concept of instantaneous signals present for special relativity?

The concept of instantaneous signals goes against the fundamental principle of special relativity, which states that no signal can travel faster than the speed of light. If instantaneous signals were possible, it would lead to a violation of causality, where an effect could occur before its cause. This poses a challenge for the theory of special relativity and has led to ongoing debates and research in the field.

5. How do experiments support the validity of special relativity?

There have been numerous experiments conducted that support the predictions of special relativity. These include the Michelson-Morley experiment, which showed that the speed of light is constant regardless of the observer's motion, and the Hafele-Keating experiment, which demonstrated the effects of time dilation on moving clocks. Other experiments, such as those involving particle accelerators, have also provided evidence for the validity of special relativity.

Similar threads

I SR vs GR: Logical Necessity of Signal Propagation
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
2K
B Differences in Predictions between SR and LR?
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
I Twin paradox, virtual clock on ship with Earth time, discontinuity
    • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
115
Views
5K
I Shape Dynamics: How Can It Offer Same Predictions as GR & SR?
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
1K
B SR vs GR - Visual Difference between Length Contraction
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
2K
B Einstein's Twin Paradox: Confusing Solution?
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
I Reference systems and apparent counter-explanations on Twin Paradox
    • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
702
I Does time dilation occur due to the speed limit of light or c?
    • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
B New Paradox Discovered, I Think
    • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
98
Views
2K
I Hafele-Keating Exp: Balancing SR Effects in Plane Ref Frame
    • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
54
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top