Recent content by Sagittarius A-Star

He describes in his scenario the differential aging as a two-way time dilation. Logically, the resulting age difference must be the sum of the (frame-dependent) time-dilations in forward and backward direction. Therefore it is not possible to define the clock-synchronization for his...

No, she doesn't (see below). Rindler didn't distinguish between "Time dilation" and "real time dilation". He wrote that time dilation is a real effect.

In this case it's magnitude depends on a convention, but not it's existence at certain velocities.

Yes. But Rindler uses the twin paradox as argument, that time dilation in general is no accident of convention.

The adjective "real" can also have the meaning, that time dilation is no accident of convention. Source: http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Special_relativity:_kinematics#Special_relativistic_kinematics

The twin paradox with muons was experimentally verified by Bailey et al. (1977) in a storage ring. It is a real effect. The distinction between twin paradox and time-dilation is analog to the distinction between two-way speed of light and one-way speed of light. The twin-paradox could also be...

Dirac's book "General Theory of Relativity" might be helpful. It has less that 70 pages. https://archive.org/details/DiracGeneralTheoryRelativity/mode/2up

You can also analyze it in a rotating frame. The circumference with respect to this frame shall be called ##U'##. You can define an inertial reference frame with only one ##x'## axis in the range ##-U'/2 < x' < +U'/2##, curled around the rim of the circular disk and rotating with it, and one...

There exists much experimental evidence for a finite invariant speed: https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html Two light pulses can have a closing speed of ##2c##. This is consistent with special relativity. The relativistic composition law for velocities is used...

This was measured within 150 years: Source: https://pappubahry.livejournal.com/572713.html

Not really. The video "explains" the direction, into which the charged cat, moving with respect to the wire rest frame, is accelerated by the field. This "explanation" refers to the physical effect, that in electrostatics charges with same sign repel each other (and do not attract each other).

Maybe the following video makes it clear. In the wire's restframe, the cat must be repelled from the wire by it's magnetic field, because: In the cat's restframe, the cat is repelled by the wire's electric charge.

The sign of the electron-charge and the current-direction/sign are a matter of convention. This doesn't change physics. The (frame-dependent) magnetic components of the electromagnetic field-tensor are a relativistic effect. Lorentz-force: The 4-force on a charge is this charge divided by...

In addition to what others wrote, Spock doesn't shake hands. He uses the following salutation: Source: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/de/wiki/Vulkanischer_Gru%C3%9F

A precondition that you can understand it is, that you first fully understand the relativistic calculation of the Sagnac-effect with respect to the rotating reference frame and the calculation of the Ehrenfest-"paradox". Links: http://www.physicsinsights.org/sagnac_1.html...