On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:55:20 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 3:41:23 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:49:01 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 10:42:36 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > > > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions:
> > > > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space
> > > SR makes no such assumption.ow come
> >
> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower rate of 1/gamma?
> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma

It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your clock (the SR observer.)
> Its rate is measured to be slower by a different/
> clock. (Reread the last sentence until you see why this is a very different claim
> that the sentence preceding it.)

How do you measure the rate f a remote clock?
>
> The source of this phenomenon is unknown,
It is known.....it is due to different states of absolute motion between the two clocks.

>all we know so far is that it can be s
> modelled mathematically in terms of certain geometry. The immediately observable
> "reason" is that the speed of light is in a certain well-defined experimental
> sense an invariant.
>
> Einstein was the first to notice this correlation. Physicists before him thought
> only that there was something peculiar about Maxwell's equations, and they quantified
> this peculiarity. But they didn't see the more direct correlation with space and time.
used to include absolute
Einstein failed because he refused to include the effects of absolute motion.
>
> --
> Jan

Ken Seto wrote:

>> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
>> > rate of 1/gamma?
>> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
>
> It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your
> clock (the SR observer.)

that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.

𝗧𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘆_𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘃:_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆_𝗶𝘀_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱_𝗯𝘆_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗵𝘆𝗽𝗼𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘆
𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗶𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹-𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁
Current leaders in North America and Western Europe are destroying the
system that underpinned their own prosperity
https://r%74.com/news/586380-global-majority-is-shocked/

Thanks God there is the global majority who can still think straight.

Soon once the Zionists and their slaves are defeated in the battlefield of
the Middle East, the dominoes will start falling, their empire of lies and
hypocrisy will end and a far better world will emerge.

Majority of the genocides committed in this world was done by the west and
it's not surprising to see them sponsoring isreali genocide.

On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 2:42:56 PM UTC-7, Jon Michael Jatzyshin wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote:
>
> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
> >> > rate of 1/gamma?
> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
> >
> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your
> > clock (the SR observer.)

Gamma slow time is manifesting. It is part of space travel.
Aging slow makes contact's distance travel more efficient.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote:
>
> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
> >> > rate of 1/gamma?
> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
> >
> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your
> > clock (the SR observer.)
> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.
Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
>
>
> 𝗧𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘆_𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘃:_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆_𝗶𝘀_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱_𝗯𝘆_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗵𝘆𝗽𝗼𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘆
> 𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗶𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹-𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁 face....
> Current leaders in North America and Western Europe are destroying the
> system that underpinned their own prosperity
> https://r%74.com/news/586380-global-majority-is-shocked/
>
> Thanks God there is the global majority who can still think straight.
>
> Soon once the Zionists and their slaves are defeated in the battlefield of
> the Middle East, the dominoes will start falling, their empire of lies and
> hypocrisy will end and a far better world will emerge.
>
> Majority of the genocides committed in this world was done by the west and
> it's not surprising to see them sponsoring isreali genocide.

Ken Seto wrote:

> On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin
> wrote:
>> Ken Seto wrote:
>> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
>> >> > rate of 1/gamma?
>> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
>> >
>> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to
>> > your clock (the SR observer.)
>> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.
>
> Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
> 1/gamma is not a slower rate?

you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it, you
fucking uneducated idiot.

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-4, Shain Baumgarten wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin
> > wrote:
> >> Ken Seto wrote:
> >> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
> >> >> > rate of 1/gamma?
> >> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
> >> >
> >> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to
> >> > your clock (the SR observer.)
> >> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.
> >
> > Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
> > 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
> you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it, you
> fucking uneducated idiot.

I don't have to prove anything to a fuck face like you. You prove that a clock running
at a rate of 1/gamma is not running slow.

Ken Seto wrote:

>> > Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
>> > 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
>> you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it,
>> you fucking uneducated idiot.
>
> I don't have to prove anything to a fuck face like you. You prove that a
> clock running at a rate of 1/gamma is not running slow.

stop lying to the american people, you repulsive paraquat. Lisa Hayes is
not your secretary. Then time passes locally at same rate, disregard
clocks and watches. I don't need to prove your mother virgin, when it's
obvious that she is not. Admit your lies and stupidity, and stop lying to
the american people.

𝗪𝗲_𝘄𝗼𝗻’𝘁_𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗸_𝘁𝗼_𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮 – Zelensky
https://r%74.com/ru%73%73ia/586590-zelensky-will-not-talk-russia/

He's kinda reminiscent of Adolf in the final days of WWII...totally
delusional. Next he'll be ordering non-existent divisions to the Russian
front.

Zelensky is "whistling past the graveyard" - a graveyard he and his
Western backers created.

He has killed so many Ukrainians. How can he have any support? He must be
gone - the sooner the better. But the fucking west, london pigs and
america, nazified those killed nazis, along a 3 decades, starting 1993.

I'm pretty sure, that he ordered censorship of all media, and now he
believes the Ukrainian media 100%!

On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 2:22:54 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 10/23/23 12:42 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 1.
> > Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute
> > rest [...]
>
> This is just plain not true -- SR makes no such "assumption", indeed
> this is nonsensical in SR.
Then how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are running slow
by a factor of 1/gama????

> > 2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT
> > is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
> >
> > 3. Please read my book before comment.
> No need. You are CLEARLY incompetent, and whatever you write is useless.
>
> Tom Roberts

Ken Seto wrote:

> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 2:22:54 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote:
>> On 10/23/23 12:42 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>> > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 1.
>> > Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute
>> > rest [...]
>>
>> This is just plain not true -- SR makes no such "assumption", indeed
>> this is nonsensical in SR.
>
> Then how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him
> are running slow by a factor of 1/gama????

that's 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, not clocks, fucking stupid. Lick my balls. I shit on
your cereals. 𝗟𝗶𝘀𝗮 𝗛𝗮𝘆𝗲𝘀 is not your secretary, you liar and thief.

𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗴𝗲𝗲𝘀_𝗶𝗻_𝗚𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆_𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿_𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗳𝗶𝘁𝘀_𝘁𝗼_𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸_–_𝗦𝗽𝗶𝗲𝗴𝗲𝗹_
Those living in the country are less willing to find a job after being
switched to more generous allowances
https://r%74.com/news/586622-ukrainian-refugees-germany-work/

In Switzerland, a pretty Ukrainian prostitute makes up to 20 000 $ per
month.

It was always the case, just look what they accomplished in their own
country , even before the war? Nothing! Whatever the Soviet Russians build
was dismantled and sold, and nothing has been built since than!

Yet the Nazi polish far right government sprays SYRIAN REFUGEES with water
cannons and doesn't give a shit if they were doctors engineers or
scientists. They put them in chain link camps and fed a largely Muslim
population bologna sandwiches and bottled water while keeping them
prisoners. Yet they give SOME NAZI SUPPORTERS A YEAR LONG ROOM AT THE RITZ
HOTELS

On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
> running slow by a factor of 1/gama????

NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that every
clock always runs at its usual rate. But they also predict that if I
measure the rate of a moving clock using my inertial rest frame, I will
MEASURE it to run at 1/gamma times its usual rate. This is NOT the clock
itself, this is a measurement in SOME OTHER INERTIAL FRAME.

It's unfortunate how many times you have been told this, and yet you
keep making the same false claim. It seems you are unable to read. How sad.

Tom Roberts

On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
> > running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
> NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that every
> clock always runs at its usual rate.
I don't accept these double talking because you assumed that a clock second is an
absolute interval of time......it is not.
Also every clock always runs at its usual rate has no meaning. It is better to say
that every relative clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates.
..
>But they also predict that if I
> measure the rate of a moving clock using my inertial rest frame, I will
> MEASURE it to run at 1/gamma times its usual rate. This is NOT the clock t rates.
> itself, this is a measure't accept this ment in SOME OTHER INERTIAL FRAME..

It is the clocks themself......that's why clocks in relative motion accumulate
clock seconds at different rates. BTW, how do you measure the rate of a clock
moving wrt you?
>

> It's unfortunate how many times you have been told this, and yet you
> keep making the same false claim. It seems you are unable to read. How sad.

I can only accept at the truth.....not what I been told.

Ken Seto wrote:

> On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
>> It's unfortunate how many times you have been told this, and yet you
>> keep making the same false claim. It seems you are unable to read. How
>> sad.
>
> I can only accept at the truth.....not what I been told.

how come a proven thief and liar, 𝘆𝗼𝘂, would ever accept 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘁𝗵𝘀??

meanwhile the 𝗸𝗵𝗮𝘇𝗮𝗿_𝗴𝗼𝘆𝘀_𝗼𝗳_𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮 are hunted by people around the world.
The kraken is been released. You are going to try to escape like dirty
pigs.

𝗕𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗞𝗜𝗡𝗚_-_𝗧𝘂𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘆_-_𝗔_𝗺𝗼𝗯_𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘀_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗻_𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆_𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲_𝗮𝘁_𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗿𝗹𝗶𝗸
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/o2lF2Xcx6Vbf

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲_𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲_𝗔𝗿𝗲_𝗧𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿_𝗖𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗿𝗲𝗻_𝗶𝗻_𝗳𝘂𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘁_𝗰𝗮𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/4KPXgA6jrfzJ

𝗟𝗼𝘂_𝗗𝗼𝗯𝗯𝘀_𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵_𝗖𝗼𝗹_𝗗𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗹𝗮𝘀_𝗠𝗮𝗰𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗴𝗼𝗿_-_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀_𝗪𝗶𝗹𝗹_𝗡𝗼𝘄_𝗘𝗻𝗱_𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀_𝗪𝗮𝗿
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/wHnm7AMTffRn

On Sunday, 5 November 2023 at 16:04:03 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
> > running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
> NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that every
> clock always runs at its usual rate.

And thus, The Shit is falsified by GPS clocks running at
9 192 631 774 instead 9 192 631 770. Your insane
screams of THE BEST WAY we're FORCED to - simply don't
work.

On 11/5/23 10:20 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
>> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him
>>> are running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
>> NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that
>> every clock always runs at its usual rate.
> I don't accept these double talking because you assumed that a clock
> second is an absolute interval of time......it is not.

Doesn't matter. Every Cs-133 atomic clock ticks at 9,192,631,770 Hz,
because that is the definition of the second. This is completely
independent of whatever you mean by "absolute interval of time" (a
phrase you have NEVER defined sufficiently precisely).

> Also every clock always runs at its usual rate has no meaning.

Sure it does. It negates your claim that "moving clocks run slow". For
Cs-133 atomic clocks, their usual rate is 9,192,631,770 Hz; other types
of clocks have different usual rates.

> It is better to say that every relative clock accumulate clock
> seconds at different rates.

BUT THEY DON'T. Every Cs-133 clock accumulates ticks at 9,192,631,770
Hz, independent of how it might be moving or where it might be located.

You keep confusing what a clock does with how it is observed/measured
from SOME OTHER INERTIAL FRAME. They are NOT the same.

I give up; don't expect me to continue until you learn how to read, and
learn basic physics.

Tom Roberts

On 11/5/23 11:30 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> The Shit is falsified by GPS clocks running at
> 9 192 631 774 instead 9 192 631 770.

I have no idea what you mean by "The Shit", but General Relativity is
CONFIRMED by the rate of GPS satellite clocks.

Tom Roberts

On Monday, 6 November 2023 at 04:35:26 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/5/23 11:30 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > The Shit is falsified by GPS clocks running at
> > 9 192 631 774 instead 9 192 631 770.
> I have no idea what you mean by "The Shit",

A l,ie, of course.

> but General Relativity is
> CONFIRMED by the rate of GPS satellite clocks.

And another lie. You've said yourself - The Shit is
predicting clocks to run everywhere at the same rate.
In GPS they're not, the prediction is falsified, goodbye,
The Shit.
Common sense was warning your idiot guru.

On Monday, 6 November 2023 at 04:33:34 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/5/23 10:20 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> >>> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him
> >>> are running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
> >> NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that
> >> every clock always runs at its usual rate.
> > I don't accept these double talking because you assumed that a clock
> > second is an absolute interval of time......it is not.
> Doesn't matter. Every Cs-133 atomic clock ticks at 9,192,631,770 Hz,

But anyone can check GPS, it's 9,192,631,774 on a satellite there.
Common sense was warning your idiot guru.

On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:33:34 PM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/5/23 10:20 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 5, 2023 at 10:04:03 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> >> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> >>> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him
> >>> are running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
> >> NOBODY who understands SR predicts that, because SR predicts that
> >> every clock always runs at its usual rate.
> > I don't accept these double talking because you assumed that a clock
> > second is an absolute interval of time......it is not.
> Doesn't matter. Every Cs-133 atomic clock ticks at 9,192,631,770 Hz,
> because that is the definition of the second. This is completely
> independent of whatever you mean by "absolute interval of time" (a
> phrase you have NEVER defined sufficiently precisely).
> > Also every clock always runs at its usual rate has no meaning.
> Sure it does. It negates your claim that "moving clocks run slow". For
> Cs-133 atomic clocks, their usual rate is 9,192,631,770 Hz; other types
> of clocks have different usual rates.es.
9,19
You failed to understand that 9,192,6 31,770 Hz of Cs-133 atomic clock is not
an absolute interval of time in different frames. For example:
9,192,631,770 Hz in frame A is equal gamma(9.192,631,770 Hz) in frame B.

> > It is better to say that every relative clock accumulate cl o
> > seconds at different rates.
> BUT THEY DON'T. Every Cs-133 clock accumulates ticks at 9,192,631,770
> Hz, independent of how it might be moving or where it might be located.
>
> You keep confusing what a clock does with how it is observed/measured
> from SOME OTHER INERTIAL FRAME. They are NOT the same.
>
> I give up; don't expect me to continue until you learn how to read, and
> learn basic physics.

Sorry, It is you who failed to understand the concept of time.
The only time exists is absolute time. A clock second contains a different interval
of absolute time in different frames.
>

On 11/6/2023 12:57 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Monday, 6 November 2023 at 04:35:26 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:

>> but General Relativity is
>> CONFIRMED by the rate of GPS satellite clocks.
>
> And another lie. You've said yourself - The Shit is
> predicting clocks to run everywhere at the same rate.
> In GPS they're not, the prediction is falsified, goodbye,
> The Shit.

I realize educating you is a lost cause, but I'll repeat anyway: On
board a GPS satellite, 1 second is equal to 9,192,631,770 cycles of its
onboard Cs clock. As we know there is another divisor, one cycle per
9,192,631,774.1 cycles, but the GPS satellite observer sees this clock
as slightly slower than 1 pulse per second. This value was deliberately
chosen so that, when the signal is blueshifted on its trip to the
ground, it is received at one pulse per second.

On Monday, 6 November 2023 at 18:35:26 UTC+1, Volney wrote:
> On 11/6/2023 12:57 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Monday, 6 November 2023 at 04:35:26 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
>
> >> but General Relativity is
> >> CONFIRMED by the rate of GPS satellite clocks.
> >
> > And another lie. You've said yourself - The Shit is
> > predicting clocks to run everywhere at the same rate.
> > In GPS they're not, the prediction is falsified, goodbye,
> > The Shit.
> I realize educating you is a lost cause, but I'll repeat anyway:

Sure, repeat your idiocies as many times as you want,
Fool yourself even more. Do it! Setting clocks to your
ISO idiocy must be Newton mode - as it doesn't work.
Right, stupid Mike?

On
> board a GPS satellite, 1 second is equal to 9,192,631,770 cycles of its

Even that idiot Roberts is admitting that a second of
GPS is different from the one of your moronic
gedanken delusions. And it is. So, no, it is
equal to ~9,192,631,774.

> as slightly slower than 1 pulse per second. This value was deliberately
> chosen so

It was chosen so, ignorig the mad screams of Roberts insisting
we're FORCED not to choose so. No, we're not. Common sense
was warning your idiot guru.

> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
>> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
>> running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
>

The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by actual
measurement, with help by other people stationary in his frame) that any
clock moving with respect to him will run slower that his own clocks, by
the factor gamma.

On 11/6/23 4:52 PM, Mike Fontenot wrote:
> The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
> person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by
> actual measurement, with help by other people stationary in his
> frame) that any clock moving with respect to him will run slower
> that his own clocks, by the factor gamma.

["that" => "than"]

That is NOT correct, and they will conclude that only if they are
idiots who don't understand SR. Yes, their MEASUREMENTS will be slower
than their own clocks, but that has NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER on the moving
clocks, each of which runs at its usual rate, not "slower". You MUST
distinguish between what an inertial frame measures for a moving clock,
and how that moving clock behaves -- the former cannot possibly affect
the latter, but that's what you claim here.

You keep using wishy-washy words that confuse both yourself and your
readers. You REALLY need to learn how to write precisely.

Tom Roberts

Mike Fontenot wrote:

>> On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
>>> running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
>>
>>
> The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
> person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by actual
> measurement, with help by other people stationary in his frame) that any
> clock moving with respect to him will run slower that his own clocks, by
> the factor gamma.

why the fuck should a clock run slower?? You two are gay lovers. And may
become the "president" of ukurina. Sniffing cocaine powder, like the gay
actor 𝗦𝗺𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆, all clocks for you will run slower.

𝗡𝗼_𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀_𝗻𝗼𝘄_–_𝗭𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆
https://r%74.com/ru%73%73ia/586713-zelensky-ukraine-not-time-elections/

Of course not, this guy is an ego maniac beggar, you think he will forfeit
his rule on Ukraine?

𝗛𝘂𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗿𝘆_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱𝗻’𝘁_𝗯𝗲_𝗶𝗻_𝗘𝗨_–_𝗡𝗮𝗻𝗰𝘆_𝗣𝗲𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗶
The former US House speaker has caused yet another international incident
https://r%74.com/ru%73%73ia/586696-ukrainian-officials-not-stealing/

𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀_𝗮𝗿𝗲_𝗻𝗼𝘁_‘𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲_𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀_𝗻𝗼_𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗿𝗼𝘄’_–_𝗙𝗠
Dmitry Kuleba has insisted that reports of widespread corruption are not
true
https://r%74.com/news/586695-pelosi-hungary-eu-interview/

On Tuesday, 7 November 2023 at 00:37:11 UTC+1, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 11/6/23 4:52 PM, Mike Fontenot wrote:
> > The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
> > person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by
> > actual measurement, with help by other people stationary in his
> > frame) that any clock moving with respect to him will run slower
> > that his own clocks, by the factor gamma.
> ["that" => "than"]
>
> That is NOT correct, and they will conclude that only if they are
> idiots who don't understand SR. Yes, their MEASUREMENTS will be slower

Having GPS, we can be absolutely sure that real MEASUREMENTS
have little in common with your absurd delusions.

On Monday, November 6, 2023 at 5:52:52 PM UTC-5, Mike Fontenot wrote:
> > On 11/5/23 7:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> >> how come every SR observer predicts all clocks moving wrt to him are
> >> running slow by a factor of 1/gama????
> >
> The correct statement is that every INERTIAL OBSERVER (i.e., every
> person who is stationary in an inertial frame) will conclude (by actual
> measurement, with help by other people stationary in his frame) that any
> clock moving with respect to him will run slower that his own clocks, by
> the factor gamma.
There is no initial frame on earth..
Every SR observer wrongly assumed that he is in an inertial frame.