Relativity of Simultaneity (Thought Experiment & Lorentz Transformations)

Simultaneous events are those physical events that may happen at different locations, but the happen at exactly the same time.

According to Special Relativity, simultaneous events are not absolute. It means that two events which are simultaneous with respect to an observer is not necessarily simultaneous for some other observer in a different inertial frame of reference. For some other observer, one event could happen before or after. This js the relativity of simultaneity. It can be demonstrated by either Einstein's Thought experiment, or by using the Lorentz transformations. In this video, I show both.

How to derive Lorentz Transformations

Peace.

𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬
Your financial support provides me an additional incentive to create high quality lecture videos. I am very much thankful for your generosity and kindness

JOIN as a member in Youtube 😇😇😇
𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬𓏬

PLAYLIST ON Special Theory of Relativity
-----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------

[FortheLoveofPhysics]

PLAYLIST ON Special Theory of Relativity

[ruvstof]

Thanks! For the first time it is explained in a way that I understand this.

[Abhisruta]

Sir, I have found you uptill now who have a crystal clear concept to make us understand. Thank you 😊.

[ronadespabiladeras]

Good day. I am a graduate student of Bicol University (Philippines) and I am currently writing my thesis on the use of flipped classroom in teaching Modern Physics. Your video is very informative and is suited to the level of my learners. Please allow me to use it in my study. Thank you very much.

[subhrajyotichatterjee]

Excellent explanation, very easy to understand. Even who doesn't have idea of calculas can also understand.

[studythenature]

Sir please give one lecture about rotating frame of reference (non inertial frame)

[cesarjom]

Excellent explanation and confirmation with use of the Lorentz transformations.

[vijayakumarhiremath]

Sir, Thank you for detail narrative video on relativity topic,

[Hunter]

He explained it in the first 50 sec. well done

[synapticmemoryseepage]

Thank you for presenting relativity of simultaneity. I am new to this material and recently read that velocity of light is the same in all inertial reference frames. As such, for the light in the train car example in this video, why does the light in the train car appear to move more quickly toward the outside observer than away from them?

[m.d.minhajulislamtamim]

Again uploaded this chapter video. Thanks.

[dharasheth]

Well explained....Can you explain the thunderbolt am not able to

[zakirhussain-jsku]

why outside Observer is not making adjustments for motion before concluding events not simultaneous ?

[EricHorchuck]

Is this the same thing as: Earth is between two stars (stars a & b) they both go supernova at the same time. There is another planet much closer to star A. They say star A went supernova first.... Is this the same thing as you are talking about? Thanks.

[sulabhvarshney]

Your videos are a breath of fresh air among boring, bookish indian physics channels.

[williamwalker]

Infinite field speeds are possible, including the speed of nearfield light!! Fields like: nearfield gravity, magnetic field, electric field, and even nearfield light are all instantaneous, and they are completely incompatible with Relativity, which says nothing travels faster than light. The main problem is that it invalidates the Relativity of Simultaneity argument. This is because instantaneous fields propagate instantaneously to all inertial reference frames, thereby preserving simultaneity in all the frames. If you look at the Lorentz transforms and make c=infinity, then gamma equals one, and the Lorentz transforms becomes the Galilean transform, where space and time are independent and absolute, and space and time are the same in all inertial frames of reference.

Relativity is just an optical illusion, and because all of modern physics is based on Relativity, modern physics is fundamentally wrong and needs to be rethought. Relativity has a simple built in logical fallacy, and no theory based on a logical fallacy can be true, no matter how many experiments seem to prove it, or how many people say it is true. Below is a very simple logical argument highlighting the logical fallacy, using the same terminology Einstein used to derive Relativity.

According to Relativity, observers on a moving train and on a stationary train platform will disagree on the size of the ""Train"" and the passage of time on the ""Train"". This is a complete logical contradiction if the size and the passage of time of the train are real. If the size of the train is real, then the ""Train"" can not be both contracted and not contracted. The same goes for the observed passage of time on the ""Train"". If these effects are observed, then the only possible conclusion is that it is an optical illusion. Things that are real must appear to be same from all frames of reference. If not, then by definition it is an illusion.

Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to passage of time on the Train, where both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated (T not equal rT). If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the ""Train"", then it must be an optical illusion.

This argument is only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more evidence including both theoretical and experimental, so please keep reading. Hi my name is Dr William Walker and I am a PhD physicist and have been investigating this topic for 30 years. It has been known since the late 1700s by Simone LaPlace that nearfield Gravity is instantaneous by analyzing the stability of the orbits of the planets about the sun. This is actually predicted by General Relativity by analyzing the propagating fields generated by an oscillating mass. In addition, General Relativity predicts that in the farfield Gravity propagates at the speed of light. The farfield speed of gravity was recently confirmed by LIGO.

Recently it has been shown that light behaves in the same way by using Maxwell's equations to analyze the propagating fields generated my an oscillating charge. For more information search: William Walker Superluminal. This was experimentally confirmed by measuring radio waves propagating between 2 antennas and separating the antennas from the nearfield to the farfield, which occurs about 1 wavelength from the source. This behavior of gravity and light occurs not only for the phase and group speed, but also the information speed. This instantaneous nature of light and gravity near the source has been kept from the public and is not commonly known. The reason is that it shows that both Special Relativity and General Relativity are wrong! It can be easily shown that Instantaneous nearfield light yields Galilean Relativity and farfield light yields Einstein Relativity. This is because in the nearfield, gamma=1since c= infinity, and in the farfield, gamma= the Relativistic gamma since c= farfield speed of light. Since time and space are real, they can not depend on the frequency of light used. This is because c=wavelength x frequency, and 1 wavelength = c/frequency defines the nearfield from the farfield. Consequently Relativity is an optical illusion. Objects moving near the speed of light appear to contract in length and time appears to slow down, but it is just what you see using farfield light. Using nearfield light you will see that the object has not contracted and time has not changed. For more information: Search William Walker Relativity.

Since General Relativity is based on Special Relativity, General Relativity must also be an optical illusion. Spacetime is flat and gravity must be a propagating field. Researchers have shown that in the weak field limit, which is what we only observe, General Relativity reduces to Gravitoelectromagnetism, which shows gravity can be modeled as 4 Maxwell equations similar in form to those for electromagnetic fields, yielding Electric and Magnetic components of gravity. This theory explains all gravitational effects as well as the instantaneous nearfield and speed of light farfield propagating fields. So gravity is a propagating field that can finally be quantized enabling the unification of gravity and quantum mechanics.

The current interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense, involving particles that are not real until measured, and in a fuzzy superposition of states. On the other hand, the Pilot Wave interpretation of Quantum Mechanics makes makes much more sense, which says particles are always real with real positions and velocities. The particles also interact with an energetic quantum field that permeates all of space, forming a pilot wave that guides the particle. This simpler deterministic explanation explains all known quantum phenomena. The only problem is that the Pilot Wave is known to interact instantaneously with all other particles, and this is completely incompatible with Relativity, but is compatible with Galilean Relativity. But because of the evidence presented here, this is no longer a problem, and elevates the Pilot Interpretation to our best explanation of Quantum Mechanics.

*YouTube presentation of above argument:

[atheistaetherist]

Here is some aether info which shows that STR is krapp.
(1) Google Demjanov's twin media (air & carbondisulphide) MMX done in Obninsk on 22 June 1970 which showed an aetherwind of 140 km/s min & 480 km/s max during a day (this was the horizontal projection of the background aetherwind which is approx 500 km/s south to north blowing approx 15 deg off Earth's spin-axis). This genius 1st order MMX was 1000 times as sensitive & accurate as the oldendays 2nd order MMXs.
(2) The MMXs were never null.
(3) The correct calibration needed to allow for length contraction caused by the aetherwind.
(4) The correct calibration needed to allow for the Fresnel Drag of light by the air. Prof Reg Cahill explains.
(5) All MMX's suffer a linear ever-growing fringe-shift that gets larger with each rotation. All MMXs that employ vertical fringes will detect this signal. This includes laser MMXs. Horizontal fringes do not suffer from this effect. Because at least one mirror has to be turned a little (horizontally) to give the desired fringes then this results in a difference in a beam's horizontal radius from the axis of rotation. Mirrors approaching the axis in effect eat waves/fringes, & mirrors going away from the axis in effect vomit waves/fringes, the eating equaling the vomiting, but in Michelson's & Miller's MMXs the non-symmetry of the beams resulted in non-equal eating/vomiting, resulting in a signal that was periodic in a full turn. The desired sought-for MMX signal (fringe shift) being periodic in a half turn. University MMXs will detect this signal if the MMX is rotated lots of times, because this signal is ever-growing, 100 rotations will give 100 times the signal that is gotten from 1 rotation. Stopping or slowing the rotation has no effect on this signal, ie it doesnt reduce this signal, the size of the signal depends only on the number of rotations, it is ever-growing. Michelson & Miller deducted this signal from their raw readings, to do so they assumed that it was linear, which it is, or, it should be, but their MMX was top-heavy & suffered from a changing lean (it floated in a mercury filled trough), plus their MMX had a sloppy pin (ie axis of rotation), hence their LEGFS was not always very linear (but that is another interesting story in its own right).
(6) Secondly the Michelson Morley MMX, & the Morley Miller MMXs, suffered a spurious signal that was periodic in a full turn. This was because their mirrors were at two levels, hence some of their light beams had to angle up & later down. This then introduced a spurious signal (fringe shift) due to angle contraction of the mirrors in their apparatus, which changed the effective lengths of the angled beams. I call such angle contraction Esclangon angle contraction, as Esclangon is i think the first person to bring it to the attention of science (but he didn't mention that it must also happen in an MMX). EAC is due to Lorentzian Length Contraction of solids (which should be called FitzGerald LC as FitzGerald was the first to predict it) which is due to any change in the aetherwind blowing throo a solid (which changes the size/shape of solids)(because solids are held together by electric forces)(these forces being affected by the wind).

[FortheLoveofPhysics]

What is Time Dilation?
What is Length Contraction?

[rbwinn]

The Lorentz explanation of simultaneity is very strange. So be brief, if a train is struck by lightning at both ends of the train as seen from the frame of reference of the track, leaving two marks on the train track, the marks will be closer together than the length of the train because of the length contraction. As seen from the frame of reference of the train, this is explained by saying that in that frame of reference, the lightning at the front of the train strikes first, then the one at the back of the train later, supposedly explaining why the marks on the track would be closer together than the length of the train. This does not follow the mathematics that scientists said they were explaining.
Suppose that there is a detector at the middle of the train that can tell us when light reaches that point from each flash of lightning. Theoretically, light from each flash of lightning will reach the detector at the same time, the same as it would reach a detector on the ground at the same time half way between the two bolts of lightning because the first photon emitted from each bolt of lightning has the same distance to travel to the detector on the middle of the train, and each photon is traveling at c=186, 000 miles per second in the frame of reference of the train. From the frame of reference of the train, the lightning makes two marks on the train track the length of the train apart, which then move with the track as it moves relative to the train beneath it. These marks on the track have nothing to do with when light will reach the detector at the middle of the train. That is determined by when and where the lightning struck in the frame of reference of the train. The lightning struck the front and rear of the train simultaneously in the frame of reference of the track, also leaving marks on the front and rear of the train. If the distance the light has to travel to the detector is half the length of the train from each direction, and light is traveling at c=186, 000 mi/sec from either direction, the lightning strikes are also simultaneous in the frame of reference of the train. The first photon emitted from the front of the train will reach the detector at the same time as the first photon emitted from the rear of the train because they were emitted at the same time and have the same distance to travel in the frame of reference of the train. Lengths remain the same. The difference is that the light from the front of the train will be brighter and have a higher frequency. This can all be explained using the Galilean transformation equations, the equations scientists threw away as an explanation of relativity in 1887 when they started using the Lorentz equations.

[itsmeism]

Can you explain the origin of second term in lotentz transformation of time?