I’m not going to rub it in. We all make mistakes, and I don’t want to be a jerk. I’m more interested in acknowledging the truth and then continuing on.
I'm going to have to ask you to stop. Nearly early post of yours in this thread includes a long passage about how much of a super expert you are, and other tangents which can be described as "discussing individuals, not ideas".
We don't do that in the upper. Obviously it will happen to everyone every now and then, but it doesn't look like a one-off oopsie with you.
Secondly, an object that's currently being thrown up is not free-falling, and Parsifal was pretty clear in declaring that that's what he's discussing. You're focusing on the "projectile that goes up" and pretending not to notice that that's simply the set up phase of the thought experiment. I'm not surprised Parsifal missed your little switcheroo, since, y'know, you're supposed to be talking about free-fall.
I asked you to post in good faith, and it was precisely to prevent these sort of non-arguments. Behave.
I do believe I’m posting in good faith. I’m not trying to muddy the waters or create conflict. Now certainly misunderstanding will happen, but I am doing my best to identify the points of misunderstanding and clear them up.
The issue at hand, Pete, is that we are not in an inertial frame in UA hence SR is invalid. This is what Parsifal disagreed with in the earlier posts.
“Since we are not in an inertial frame in UA, SR is invalid.
Disagree”
The Burj example cited in the disagreement involves motion upwards and then downwards. It was not clear to me that he wanted only to analyse the motion downward - otherwise why include the motion upwards in the first place? Just have an object fall, no hyperloop needed.
But this is immaterial, because even with a falling object, WE are still accelerating in UA, so WE are not in an inertial frame.
Parsifal agreed with this statement initially.
I am not implying that my knowledge of SR is better than anyone else’s, I’m just trying to get to the bottom of this - just like everyone else, and posting my current understanding of the situation.
Also, from some googling, I see that “free-fall” is defined as an object near the surface of the earth that is being influenced only by earth’s gravity. In the UA situation, I suppose this translates to an object near the surface of the Earth while the Earth accelerated upwards. So if my understanding is correct, then an object can be in free-fall regardless of whether it’s instantaneous velocity is pointing up or down.
I think these discussions are useful in figuring out the details of the UA idea. And even if not all aspects are resolved, they help better mold everyone’s conception of the idea, and further lay foundations for developments.
This is my intention. Sorry it has come off as anything else.