Special relativity and absolute time

[ilyal]

hi,

after reading
http://www.theculture.org/rich...e/archives/000089.html

i got curious is there actully someting in relativity that forbids absolute time?
or is it just ugly becuse it ruins the Symmetry between inertial frames of references?

is it possiable that instantaneous transmission device that only works in the
"real" resting frame can be made?

also, a little unrelated, but i read somewhere that you can measure your speed
relative to the background radition, can you say if your at rest relative to the univeres according to this speed?

thx

 

[KIAman]

...someting[sic] in relativity[sic] that forbids absolute time?

Your answer is in the article you linked.

Article snippet
1. The laws of physics look the same to all observers in inertial reference frames. This is the "Principle of Relativity" that lets us perform calculations relative to any inertial frame we like and be assured that we will get the same values for all physically meaningful quantitites. This postulate holds in classical mechanics too.


2. The speed of light is the same in all directions in all inertial frames. It is this postulate that gives rise to all the strange consequences of special relativity, including those discussed here.

There is no such thing as a "real" resting frame. Everything is relative to everything.

 

[ilyal]

yes, but my question is:

is there is a proof for the following statement:

1. The laws of physics look the same to all observers in inertial reference frames. This is the "Principle of Relativity" that lets us perform calculations relative to any inertial frame we like and be assured that we will get the same values for all physically meaningful quantitites. This postulate holds in classical mechanics too.

or rather it is a kind of axiom?

 

[KIAman]

Yes, that is a postulate to support the theory of General Relativity. There is no absolute definitive proof other than all of the empirical evidence gathered from observations and experiments which validate the postulate.

General Relativity is a theory and not a law. Your original question asked "...something in relativity that forbids..." which I assumed you meant in regards to the theory itself, not external proof of the theory.

Just to blow your mind, everything in motion experiences a different time than everything else. This has been experimentally proven and even used in many of our communications technology.

 

[imported_ssj4Gogeta]

Originally posted by: ilyal
yes, but my question is:

is there is a proof for the following statement:

1. The laws of physics look the same to all observers in inertial reference frames. This is the "Principle of Relativity" that lets us perform calculations relative to any inertial frame we like and be assured that we will get the same values for all physically meaningful quantitites. This postulate holds in classical mechanics too.

or rather it is a kind of axiom?

It's quite logical. Consider two observers in two different reference frames. Their observations will obviously differ. Now you don't have any reason to prefer one's observations over other's. This is exactly what relativity says.

 

[Comdrpopnfresh]

It's not a question of absolute time- but of an absolute frame; which does not exist. Communications satellites move so quickly relative to positions on the ground that the timing of transmissions and circuitry must account for relativistic effects- but equivalent actions, such as calculations or timing, of those on the ground are no more right/wrong than those on satellites in orbit. The 'equivalent actions' are synonymous to the laws of physics in (1.). If you and I were moving away from one another at differing speeds near the speed of light, and a bright flash occurred somewhere between us, our observations would differ from one another and from a third frame not inline with us. This is all an effect of Special Relativity though; be careful to not interchange special and general relativity- they are not one in the same.
An instantaneous transmission device? If you mean oddities of quantum entanglement... the effects are only truthful if someone where in the nonexistent absolute reference frame:
If I'm on one side of the universe, and you are on the other... and we have quantum-entangled coins... If I flip mine and you flip yours... they both end up heads up... whose coin influenced the other? How do we know we flipped them at the same time? It is a lack of locality.

 

[KIAman]

^ Actually, you could have an absolute reference frame. The center of mass of the collective universe.

 

[iCyborg]

CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) rest frame is in some sense the rest frame of the universe and we could define it as absolute. What STR really says is that any frame is as good as any other when it comes to doing experiments.