<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by makis</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by north</i>
<br />
supplemental
actually the experiment is flawed in that the observer on the table does not have his own dynometer. the one for the person on the chair is calibrated to his motion, rotation. now the observer on the table needs to have a dynometer calibrated to his motion so that he can compare each dynometer. the table top observer dynometer is calibrated from his relative position he sees from the begining that it is at zero, then gets on the table. you see it is an imbalanced experiment the observer on the chair can see the results of the motion but the observer although he my not detect physically now knows that it is happening because his dynometer indicates that he is. even though the one on the table indicates that he is not. this observer then tries to find the reason why the reason for the discrepancy. he will find he is motion although he can not sense it.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Empirical observation say you are wrong. A strech on a spring is a strech on spring no matter where you look at it from. Hooke's law is not a matter of perception or point of view.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
sure a stretch is a stretch is a stretch.
but my point is this you are giving one observer the ability to measure movement the other not.(the instrument,dynometer)therefore the only way that the second observer can become aware that he has movement, is if he can perceive it. there is no choice for the second observer.
now say both observers equally understand what this instrument will tell them and that the instruments measurements can be seen from the perspective of each observer. they can then see that the instrument is telling them <b>BOTH</b> that there is indeed movement. this is because they know that if there was no movement the instrument would show 0(zero) movement. but the instrument actually does show movement,which they can MEASURE but not perceive.
By the way, this experiment is mentioned in high school level books<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">.
if it is then it must be recognized as a mistake and corrected.for the good of us all. we made a mistake, who hasn't.
