Many relativists believe (because they don't think) that when a rocket
(for example) is heading towards the earth at high speed (say v=0.8c as
usual) and it is 12 years away -lights of the earth (in the terrestrial
frame of reference), she sees the earth located at 7.2 al. They call this
distance contraction, and they apply D'=D.sqrt(1-v²/c²).
The biggest pundits, ALL, are fooled by uncertain concepts, and which they
do not master at all (hence the insults and hatred against good old Doctor
Hachel when he tries to explain more clearly the things).
Remember, that's NOT how it works. Earth is actually 36 light years from
the rocket.
This is the relativistic spatial zoom effect.
This is what the Lorentz transformations established by Henri Poincaré
say.
Let us put them in Hachel notation.
E=(12,0,0,-12,0) I am at rest relative to the earth but where the rocket
is.
For the rocket, E'=(36,0,0,-36,0)

This is a simple well-understood Lorentz transformation, followed by the
last coordinate which is the instant when the observer perceives what he
perceives.

For x', we have:
x'=(x-vt₀)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)

That is x'=(12-0.8.(-12))/0.6

The earth is seen at this instant at 36 ly.

Thank you Professeur Henri Poincaré for your transformations.

It's extremely simple when you take the right habits, the right notations,
and the right concepts.

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

> Many relativists believe (because they don't think) that when a rocket
> (for example) is heading towards the earth at high speed (say v=0.8c as
> usual) and it is 12 years away -lights of the earth

Word salad. Start over again.

> (in the terrestrial frame of reference), she sees the earth located at 7.2
al.

“al”?

> They call this distance contraction

“length contraction”, instead.

> and they apply D'=D.sqrt(1-v²/c²).

Correct. It is a consequence of the EXPERIMENTALLY CONFIRMED Lorentz
transformation:

x = γ ( x' − v t')
Δx = γ (Δx' − v Δt').
Δt' ≔ 0 [lengths are always measured in a frame at the same time]

⇒ Δx = γ Δx' ⇔ Δx' = Δx/γ = Δx √(1 − v²/c²).

Highschool kids can do this. Why are you INCAPABLE of it?

> The biggest pundits, ALL, are fooled by uncertain concepts, and which they
> do not master at all (hence the insults and hatred against good old Doctor
> Hachel

Statements like these show that you are very likely mentally very ill,
suffering from schizophrenic megalomania. That is not hatred, but an acute
observation.

If you would not repeatedly bother the world with your nonsense in the most
obnoxious way (including inappropriate comparisons with the Nazi regime),
one could have pity on you. As you do, though, you experience the disdain
that you deserve for it.

If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

PointedEars
--
Q: What did the female magnet say to the male magnet?
A: From the back, I found you repulsive, but from the front
I find myself very attracted to you.
(from: WolframAlpha)

Le 02/02/2022 à 22:45, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :
> Richard Hachel wrote:
>
>> Many relativists believe (because they don't think) that when a rocket
>> (for example) is heading towards the earth at high speed (say v=0.8c as
>> usual) and it is 12 years away -lights of the earth
>
> Word salad. Start over again.
>
>> (in the terrestrial frame of reference), she sees the earth located at 7.2
> al.
>
> “al”?

al = années-lumière in french.

>> They call this distance contraction
>
> “length contraction”, instead.

It's the same.

>
>> and they apply D'=D.sqrt(1-v²/c²).
>
> Correct. It is a consequence of the EXPERIMENTALLY CONFIRMED Lorentz
> transformation:
>
> x = γ ( x' − v t')
> Δx = γ (Δx' − v Δt').
>
> Δt' ≔ 0 [lengths are always measured in a frame at the same time]
>
> ⇒ Δx = γ Δx' ⇔ Δx' = Δx/γ = Δx √(1 − v²/c²).

Pffff...

No, it's not correct.

This is not what the Lorentz transformations say.

You apply them badly (but it's not your fault, you were taught them like
that). Hence the impossibility of dealing with a Langevin in apparent
speed, which quickly turns absurd if you practice like you.

> PointedEars

R.H.

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 5:58:33 PM UTC-5, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 02/02/2022 à 22:45, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn a écrit :
> > Richard Hachel wrote:

> > al.
> >
> > “al”?
> al = années-lumière in french.

Learn to write appropriately. Learn to write consistently. Use the appropriate language.

> >> They call this distance contraction
> >
> > “length contraction”, instead.
> It's the same.

No they are not. Learn the appropriate language.

> > x = γ ( x' − v t')
> > Δx = γ (Δx' − v Δt').
> >
> > Δt' ≔ 0 [lengths are always measured in a frame at the same time]
> >
> > ⇒ Δx = γ Δx' ⇔ Δx' = Δx/γ = Δx √(1 − v²/c²).
> Pffff...
>
> No, it's not correct.

What step, what algebraic manipulation you do not agree with?

> This is not what the Lorentz transformations say.

The different nation is right above. Which Step, which manipulation is in error?

> You apply them badly (but it's not your fault, you were taught them like
> that).

So you claim, yet you do not show which Step, which manipulation is wrong.

And I see that you cowarded away our past conversation in the other thread..
You got cornered, you had no more review do, so you just remain silent and started a new thread.
That is typical crank Behavior. Didn't you know that?

Le 03/02/2022 à 00:15, rotchm a écrit :

>> > “length contraction”, instead.
>> It's the same.
>
> No they are not. Learn the appropriate language.

Contraction of lengths, contraction of distances, it is exactly the same
thing.

Those who are unable to understand this should abandon the theory of
relativity.

If a rocket is heading towards me, in the earth-moon axis, I see it three
times longer.
It's not ME who says it, it's all the physicists in the world.

Let v=0.8c.

We have a rocket that will now measure L'=L.sqrt(1-v²/c²)/(1+cosµ.v/c)

But what we don't know is that on the other side, the effects are
symmetrical.

And that's what physicists don't understand, and that's why they laugh
when I tell them their Langevin sucks and I give them the right
explanation.

On the other side, in the reference frame of the rocket, there is a
Doppler effect of the same nature. The earth-moon distance seems three
times greater.

It is absolutely incredible that no one can understand this simple
effect.

But how do I explain it?

The problem is YOU, and until we put our cards on the table, until we
make ANY effort to understand what I'm saying, we'll be going in circles.
The worst part is that it's voluntary on your part.

You have to stop messing around though.

I would never believe that this is pure cretinism.

There is a moment, we feel that the person opposite is doing everything
not to understand.

Voluntarily or not.

Of course yes, distance or length is the same thing.

Do you really believe that the distance between two points in space does
not contract the same way as the length between them? Or do you think it's
not reciprocal?

Truly I tell you (Jesus Christ) the problem is YOU. It's not me.

R.H.

On Wednesday, February 2, 2022 at 6:48:41 PM UTC-5, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 03/02/2022 à 00:15, rotchm a écrit :

> If a rocket is heading towards me, in the earth-moon axis, I see it three
> times longer.
> It's not ME who says it, it's all the physicists in the world.

So you are saying that you are a parrot?
Don't copy them. Learn the appropriate language, learn to express yourself clearly.
Don't imitate those who can't.

<snip; I glanced at what you wrote, and it looked like gibberish again. So I did not read it. If you would learn to to write concisely and clearly, then we will read and understand what do you write>