Consistency Test of an Alternative Kinematics: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| published = 1989 | | published = 1989 | ||
| journal = [[Physics Essays]] | | journal = [[Physics Essays]] | ||
| volume = | | volume = 2 | ||
| number = | | number = 4 | ||
| pages = 380-384 | | pages = 380-384 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
A proposed alternative to Einstein's kinematics, based on the postulated invariance 1) of particle proper time and 2) of object length (i.e., nonoccurrence of the Lorentz contraction), is tested for its ability to exhibit consistency between the aging rates of an accelerated 'light clock' and its comoving observer. The problem is nontrivial because the altered kinematics requires employment of an altered electromagnetism, the so-called 'neo-Hertzian' generalization of Maxwell's theory, which is invariant under inertial transformations. Difficulties of crucial experimentation are touched upon.[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | A proposed alternative to Einstein's kinematics, based on the postulated invariance 1) of particle proper time and 2) of object length (i.e., nonoccurrence of the Lorentz contraction), is tested for its ability to exhibit consistency between the aging rates of an accelerated 'light clock' and its comoving observer. The problem is nontrivial because the altered kinematics requires employment of an altered electromagnetism, the so-called 'neo-Hertzian' generalization of Maxwell's theory, which is invariant under inertial transformations. Difficulties of crucial experimentation are touched upon. | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper|consistency test alternative kinematics]] | |||
Latest revision as of 09:22, 21 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Consistency Test of an Alternative Kinematics |
| Author(s) | Thomas E Phipps |
| Keywords | Kinematics |
| Published | 1989 |
| Journal | Physics Essays |
| Volume | 2 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 380-384 |
Abstract
A proposed alternative to Einstein's kinematics, based on the postulated invariance 1) of particle proper time and 2) of object length (i.e., nonoccurrence of the Lorentz contraction), is tested for its ability to exhibit consistency between the aging rates of an accelerated 'light clock' and its comoving observer. The problem is nontrivial because the altered kinematics requires employment of an altered electromagnetism, the so-called 'neo-Hertzian' generalization of Maxwell's theory, which is invariant under inertial transformations. Difficulties of crucial experimentation are touched upon.