most of the time debating about space, time, these concepts are confused
with length and duration

it started from the MMX null result,
the contraction of the arm of the apparatus
proposed by Lorentz to explain it, was a plausible physical good explanation,
unfortunately it turned into the aberrant content of the Lorentz transforms, which imply not the contraction of a moving object but the contraction of the entire observed space.
this little conceptual derangement has brought around a inextricable mess and an irremediable confusion ,
of course some , many maybe, know, but no one is able to bring the conceptual mess straight again, only a self salvation is possible.
cheers
beda

On Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 12:49:03 PM UTC-7, beda-p...@libero.it wrote:
> it started from the MMX null result, the contraction of the arm of the apparatus
> proposed by Lorentz to explain it, was a plausible physical good explanation,
> unfortunately it turned into the aberrant content of the Lorentz transforms, which
> imply not the contraction of a moving object but the contraction of the entire
> observed space.

No. How many times has relativistic length contraction (and time dilation and skew of simultaneity) been explained to you? How many? What part of the explanation don't you understand? Why does your brain keep reverting to the misconceptions you held before it was all clearly explained to you?

beda pietanza wrote:

> most of the time debating about space, time, these concepts are confused
> with length and duration it started from the MMX null result,
> the contraction of the arm of the apparatus proposed by Lorentz to
> explain it, was a plausible physical good explanation,
> unfortunately it turned into the aberrant content of the Lorentz
> transforms, which imply not the contraction of a moving object but the
> contraction of the entire observed space.
> this little conceptual derangement has brought around a inextricable
> mess and an irremediable confusion ,
> of course some , many maybe, know, but no one is able to bring the
> conceptual mess straight again, only a self salvation is possible.

It's the spatial projection shrinking, and the objects in it have no
choice but to follow it 100%. What would you suggest, recently?

Dottor Mariano Amici - La pandemia e la STRATEGIA PERPETRATA DALLE
MULTINAZIONALI

Il giorno sabato 29 maggio 2021 alle 22:43:40 UTC+2 Lee Woo ha scritto:
> beda pietanza wrote:
>
> > most of the time debating about space, time, these concepts are confused
> > with length and duration it started from the MMX null result,
> > the contraction of the arm of the apparatus proposed by Lorentz to
> > explain it, was a plausible physical good explanation,
> > unfortunately it turned into the aberrant content of the Lorentz
> > transforms, which imply not the contraction of a moving object but the
> > contraction of the entire observed space.
> > this little conceptual derangement has brought around a inextricable
> > mess and an irremediable confusion ,
> > of course some , many maybe, know, but no one is able to bring the
> > conceptual mess straight again, only a self salvation is possible.
> It's the spatial projection shrinking, and the objects in it have no
> choice but to follow it 100%. What would you suggest, recently?
beda
a spatial projection cannot have any physical meaning: if we know it is a projection we
can figure out what is it real shape of the object.
but be simple: let take a walk anywhere in space holding two identical clocks,
we keep one with us and send one inertially away, what happen to the traveling clock
while it is moving away??
if you answer correctly this you are on safe ground.
I gave my answer: it changes its time rate according to its new absolute inertial speed
cheers
beda
>
> Dottor Mariano Amici - La pandemia e la STRATEGIA PERPETRATA DALLE
> MULTINAZIONALI

On Sunday, May 30, 2021 at 4:34:21 AM UTC-4, beda-p...@libero.it wrote:
> Il giorno sabato 29 maggio 2021 alle 22:43:40 UTC+2 Lee Woo ha scritto:

You got got by the troll again.
Since you didn't notice it was the troll, this shows you do not have the brains
to do physics. I hope you realize this. Friendly advice: go find another hobby.

Il giorno domenica 30 maggio 2021 alle 20:03:51 UTC+2 mitchr...@gmail.com ha scritto:
> Space does not contract but time does slow...
> After time slows it can speed back up.
>
> Mitchell Raemsch
beda
your wording is a bit strange,
space and time don't change,
length of objects and/or duration of a phenomenon can change,
pay attention to the conceptual distinction between space<-->length,
time<-->duration!!!!
cheers
beda

beda pietanza wrote:

>> It's the spatial projection shrinking, and the objects in it have no
>> choice but to follow it 100%. What would you suggest, recently?
> beda a spatial projection cannot have any physical meaning: if we know
> it is a projection we can figure out what is it real shape of the
> object. but be simple: let take a walk anywhere in space holding two
> identical clocks, we keep one with us and send one inertially away,
> what happen to the traveling clock while it is moving away??
> if you answer correctly this you are on safe ground.

longer, measurable *path* along spacetime. The spacetime is the manifold
control volume. You can always measure distances inside *control_volumes*

> I gave my answer: it changes its time rate according to its new absolute
> inertial speed cheers beda

Il giorno sabato 29 maggio 2021 alle 22:01:51 UTC+2 Cliff Hallston ha scritto:
> On Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 12:49:03 PM UTC-7, beda-p...@libero.it wrote:
> > it started from the MMX null result, the contraction of the arm of the apparatus
> > proposed by Lorentz to explain it, was a plausible physical good explanation,
> > unfortunately it turned into the aberrant content of the Lorentz transforms, which
> > imply not the contraction of a moving object but the contraction of the entire
> > observed space.
> No. How many times has relativistic length contraction (and time dilation and skew of simultaneity) been explained to you? How many? What part of the explanation don't you understand? Why does your brain keep reverting to the misconceptions you held before it was all clearly explained to you?
beda
how many times I have been telling you that, we must start to reckon
what happens to a single ruler and to a single light clock (constructed
on a ruler) when they travel on their own in space, when they change their
movements, referring their new conditions to their previous ones, out of
any human frame or intervention??
what you do to make for practical measurements come after we agree on the above.
no SR tricky shortcuts and manipulation, just conceptual raw physical facts
cheers
beda

Il giorno lunedì 31 maggio 2021 alle 23:34:04 UTC+2 Lee Woo ha scritto:
> beda pietanza wrote:
>
> >> It's the spatial projection shrinking, and the objects in it have no
> >> choice but to follow it 100%. What would you suggest, recently?
> > beda a spatial projection cannot have any physical meaning: if we know
> > it is a projection we can figure out what is it real shape of the
> > object. but be simple: let take a walk anywhere in space holding two
> > identical clocks, we keep one with us and send one inertially away,
> > what happen to the traveling clock while it is moving away??
> > if you answer correctly this you are on safe ground.
> longer, measurable *path* along spacetime. The spacetime is the manifold
> control volume. You can always measure distances inside *control_volumes*
beda
likely my fault, but I don't understand a word you say
cheers
> > I gave my answer: it changes its time rate according to its new absolute
> > inertial speed cheers beda

On 6/2/2021 8:16 AM, beda pietanza wrote:
> Il giorno lunedì 31 maggio 2021 alle 23:34:04 UTC+2 Lee Woo ha scritto:
>> beda pietanza wrote:
>>
>>> beda a spatial projection cannot have any physical meaning: if we know
>>> it is a projection we can figure out what is it real shape of the
>>> object. but be simple: let take a walk anywhere in space holding two
>>> identical clocks, we keep one with us and send one inertially away,
>>> what happen to the traveling clock while it is moving away??
>>> if you answer correctly this you are on safe ground.

>> longer, measurable *path* along spacetime. The spacetime is the manifold
>> control volume. You can always measure distances inside *control_volumes*

> beda
> likely my fault, but I don't understand a word you say
> cheers

You got suckered by the nymshifting troll. Again.

On Wednesday, June 2, 2021 at 5:13:57 AM UTC-7, beda-p...@libero.it wrote:
> We must start to reckon what happens to a single ruler and to a single light clock...

The subject is not just light clocks,and remember that you couldn't even account for the behavior of light clocks except for those oriented parallel to the motion, and you couldn't account for mass-spring clocks other than by agreeing that energy has inertia, which implies local Lorentz invariance. We always consider individual entities, and we describe them in terms of physically meaningful systems of coordinates. Your insistence on claiming that we must never use physically meaningful coordinates to describe things is just absurd, like one hand clapping.

beda pietanza wrote:

>> > beda a spatial projection cannot have any physical meaning: if we
>> > know it is a projection we can figure out what is it real shape of
>> > the object. but be simple: let take a walk anywhere in space holding
>> > two identical clocks, we keep one with us and send one inertially
>> > away, what happen to the traveling clock while it is moving away??
>> > if you answer correctly this you are on safe ground.
>> longer, measurable *path* along spacetime. The spacetime is the
>> manifold control volume. You can always measure distances inside
>> *control_volumes*
> beda likely my fault, but I don't understand a word you say cheers
>> > I gave my answer: it changes its time rate according to its new
>> > absolute inertial speed cheers beda

Physics in this universe works inside domains, say control_volumes, which
are the basics in physics. Once you are math modelling a phenomenon, you
have to define in place your domain by the very first. Nothing may take
place outside your domain of applicability. If it does, that's not an
answer to anything. What is it you don't understand.

Il giorno mercoledì 2 giugno 2021 alle 18:32:33 UTC+2 Cliff Hallston ha scritto:
> On Wednesday, June 2, 2021 at 5:13:57 AM UTC-7, beda-p...@libero.it wrote:
> > We must start to reckon what happens to a single ruler and to a single light clock...
>
> The subject is not just light clocks,and remember that you couldn't even account for the behavior of light clocks except for those oriented parallel to the motion, and you couldn't account for mass-spring clocks other than by agreeing that energy has inertia, which implies local Lorentz invariance.. We always consider individual entities, and we describe them in terms of physically meaningful systems of coordinates. Your insistence on claiming that we must never use physically meaningful coordinates to describe things is just absurd, like one hand clapping.
beda
coordinates can be used awarely,
in the case of inertial coordinate systems we must be aware that they are build, intentionally, using the hidden absolute speeds of light and the absolute speed of the frame, and we must be aware that through the Esynchronization the hidden absolute speed of the frame is transferred automatically to the perfect "asynchrony" of the clocks, indeed, along the x axis of the SR frame, the row of clocks are retarded exactly of a value v (absolute speed of the frame) for each unit of the distance along the x axis.
if you pretend not to know this, or you ignore this, you are not aware of the SR tools you are using.

as far as I am concerned, being I not a physicist, I am basically interested in the conceptual confusion that the bigot
usage of the SR has brought about and spread among lay people, resulting in disaffection, distrust in science and conceptual misconception about the fundamental concepts of space and time.
cheers
beda