ACG52

There is no time travel. At least backwards. We all travel forward in time.

It's not a theory of light, it's a theory of the electromagnetic field.

That's 3 years out of date. It's the OPERA experiment at CERN. The FTL measurement was an error, caused by a loose cable connection on the detector.

Most of relativity is difficult to visualize.

I quoted you saying this: That's what I want a citation for. You need to work on your sentence structure, which is quite confusing.

This is what I want a citation for, not three articles on wiki that have nothing to do with my question.

Do you have a citation for this?

There is no force of compression. The atoms don't get any closer to each other, in their own frame, they don't get any denser.

They gain energy, not mass.I'm not saying SR is nonsense, I'm saying your post is nonsense. You continually attribute things which were never said, so you can argue against them. You seem to have problems actually responding to points made.

Nonsense.

Nonsense.

Relativistic mass is an obsolete concept. Most of what you post is simply erroneous, showing a shallow, partial at best understanding of relativity.

Do you know what a black body is? Radiation has nothing to do with gravity.

The fact that you can get that from my posts shows that you don't understand relativity. Or that your reading comprehension needs work.

You seem to be saying that you aren't really right, but you're close.

Atomic structures do not contract. Density does not increase and there is no relativistic mass. You're simply wrong.

Length contraction does not happen because atoms pack themselves more tightly. It happens because the geometry of space/time changes with relative motion. Nothing becomes denser in it's own frame of reference.

You keep harping, mistakenly on agreement between frames. Let's put it this was, no two different frames will agree on length or time.

So you're saying there are inertial frames were things would not look normal to those in the frame?

Post 29 is correct. In their own reference frame there is no contraction of dilation noticed. It implied nothing like that. It stated that relativistic effects are not measured in an inertial frame by an observer in that frame. No one brought up aliens, or stated that everyone would measure the same thing.

I'm not sure where you get that statement from, because it's certainly nothing I would say or agree with. What post number are you referring to.

My original statement is what you're now agreeing with.

Everyone always counts time normally in their frame, regardless of their relative motion with other frames. If I count time in another frame in relative motion to mine, I will see their time as passing slower, but as far as they're concerned, their time is normal, and my time is slow. Time IS relative.

No, because in the ships own reference frame it is not contracted.