{"id":883,"date":"2023-02-27T23:07:39","date_gmt":"2023-02-27T23:07:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/?p=883"},"modified":"2023-02-27T23:17:35","modified_gmt":"2023-02-27T23:17:35","slug":"another-quora-relsim-question","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/2023\/02\/27\/another-quora-relsim-question\/","title":{"rendered":"Yet Another Quora Question:\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Is there experimental evidence of RoS (relativity of simultaneity) available? According to Carl Popper something that cannot be falsified is metaphysics. Can the ALT (absolute Lorentz transformation) and absolute simultaneity be used instead of RoS?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Yes. There is lots of evidence that IF observers define simultaneity of remote events by comparing the arrival times of light signals from those events and adjusting for the light travel times, then they will NOT agree on which pairs of events are or are not simultaneous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><br>What cannot be falsified (and so, according to Popper, is not worthy of consideration as scientific) is the claim that one particular set of \u201cstationary\u201d observers are \u201ccorrect\u201d and the rest are \u201cwrong\u201d about the \u201cactual\u201d simultaneity (with the observations of the \u201cwrong\u201d ones being explained by effects of their \u201cmotion\u201d on their clocks and measuring rods).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><br>The \u201cmetaphysical\u201d question of whether or not there is such a particular set of \u201cstationary\u201d frames is generally resolved by reference to \u201cOckham\u2019s Razor\u201d which advises us to prefer an explanation which involves fewer arbitrary choices. To the extent that the identification of a particular preferred set of \u201cstationary\u201d frames is arbitrary, we are therefore advised to treat them all as equally valid and make no choice of what constitutes \u201cabsolute\u201d simultaneity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><br>Of course, any particular feature of the universe (such as for example, the cosmic background microwave radiation (CBMR)) can, if we like, be taken as defining an \u201cabsolute\u201d rest frame (and so an \u201cabsolute\u201d sense of simultaneity). And if I were moving at a noticeably high speed relative to the CBMR, then it might indeed be presumptuous to declare my own synchronization as more fundamental, but it would not in fact lead to any difference in anyone\u2019s prediction of any testable event.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Source: <em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.quora.com\/Is-there-experimental-evidence-of-RoS-relativity-of-simultaneity-available-According-to-Carl-Popper-something-that-cannot-be-falsified-is-metaphysics-Can-the-ALT-absolute-Lorentz-transformation-and-absolute\/answer\/Alan-Cooper-5\">(1000) Alan Cooper&#8217;s answer to Is there experimental evidence of RoS (relativity of simultaneity) available? According to Carl Popper something that cannot be falsified is metaphysics. Can the ALT (absolute Lorentz transformation) and absolute simultaneity be used instead of RoS? &#8211; Quora<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Is there experimental evidence of RoS (relativity of simultaneity) available? According to Carl Popper something that cannot be falsified is metaphysics. Can the ALT (absolute Lorentz transformation) and absolute simultaneity be used instead of RoS? Yes. There is lots of evidence that IF observers define simultaneity of remote events by comparing the arrival times of &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/2023\/02\/27\/another-quora-relsim-question\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Yet Another Quora Question:\u00a0<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,4],"tags":[],"topics":[],"class_list":["post-883","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all","category-quora-answers"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/883","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=883"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/883\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":896,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/883\/revisions\/896"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=883"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=883"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=883"},{"taxonomy":"topics","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/physics\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topics?post=883"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}