<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp/Data.Media:1>

In a given reference frame R, a small monochromatic light emits in the
yellow.

When O' crosses O, the position of the lamp forms an angle µ with the Ox
axis in R.

1. What will be the value of this angle in R'?

2. What will be the new observed monochromatic wavelength?

Answers:

cosµ'=(cosµ+v/c)/(1+cosµ.v/c)

λ'=λ.sqrt(1-v²/c²)/(1+cosµ.v/c)

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp>

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

> In a given reference frame R, a small monochromatic light emits in the
> yellow.
> When O' crosses O, the position of the lamp forms an angle µ with the Ox
> axis in R. 1. What will be the value of this angle in R'?

Bill Gates says Omicron ‘sadly’ spreads immunity faster than vaccines
harps://www.bitchute.com/video/mVYLKwFiWzYj/

Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.):
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp/Data.Media:1>
>
>
> In a given reference frame R, a small monochromatic light emits in the
> yellow.
>
> When O' crosses O, the position of the lamp forms an angle µ with the Ox
> axis in R.
>
> 1. What will be the value of this angle in R'?
>
> 2. What will be the new observed monochromatic wavelength?
>
> Answers:
>
> cosµ'=(cosµ+v/c)/(1+cosµ.v/c)
>
> λ'=λ.sqrt(1-v²/c²)/(1+cosµ.v/c)
>
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp>

So what? These are well known formulas in Relativity for more than
a century, reference can be seen (for instance) there:

https://arxiv.org/html/physics/9806037

(with a different convention for the angle A = pi - µ)

There is a big difference though, between Hachel/Lengrand and
Relativity: it Relativity these equations are actually derived
from LTs, in Hachel/Lengrand there are pulled out of his hat.

By the way, what's the point of parroting SR while just a
few days ago, a specific situation where YOUR claims and
SR results differ? Did you realize that you were in bad
posture, so you need diversion?

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 14:59:51 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.):
> > <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp/Data.Media:1>
> >
> >
> > In a given reference frame R, a small monochromatic light emits in the
> > yellow.
> >
> > When O' crosses O, the position of the lamp forms an angle µ with the Ox
> > axis in R.
> >
> > 1. What will be the value of this angle in R'?
> >
> > 2. What will be the new observed monochromatic wavelength?
> >
> > Answers:
> >
> > cosµ'=(cosµ+v/c)/(1+cosµ.v/c)
> >
> > λ'=λ.sqrt(1-v²/c²)/(1+cosµ.v/c)
> >
> > <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp>
> So what? These are well known formulas in Relativity for more than

And what is your definition of a "theory" in the
terms of Peano arithmetics, poor stinker?

Python wrote:

>> λ'=λ.sqrt(1-v²/c²)/(1+cosµ.v/c)
>> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=jJeYA3YCt-5g6MqSqkW4jqy5WUw@jntp>
>
> So what? These are well known formulas in Relativity for more than a
> century, reference can be seen (for instance) there:

most probably after the first 2 nukes fall on the head of NATO generals ,
they'll flee the Baltic states within minutes as NATO does not consider
them a core interest but only an appendage to western civilization . The 3
Baltic , *cheap_fascist_states* were only used as a provocation against
Russia and the Soviet Union.

you capitalist fake money guys forgot what fascism stands for, and you
have it planetary scale, open like into capitalist soros tax evasion
*Open_Society*.

wanker Stoltenberg, not even understanding engilsh, insisted that NATO was
a defensive alliance “not threatening Russia or anyone else. Sure, they
just bombed Serbia, Libya, Syria, Afghan, Irak, Africa etc etc and etc.

Le 19/02/2022 à 15:46, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

> poor stinker?

Non, non, il ne faut pas insulter.

C'est pas bien.

R.H.

Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :

> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?

No.

And you?

R.H.

Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
> Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
>
>> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
>
> No.

You didn't realize it, but still you are.

> And you?

Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 19:19:43 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
> > Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
> >
> >> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
> >
> > No.
> You didn't realize it, but still you are.
>
> > And you?
>
> Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)

And your definition of a "theory" in the terms
of Peano arithmetics is ...?

Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 19:19:43 UTC+1, Python wrote:
>> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
>>> Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
>>>
>>>> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
>>>
>>> No.
>> You didn't realize it, but still you are.
>>
>>> And you?
>>
>> Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)
>
> And your definition of a "theory" in the terms
> of Peano arithmetics is ...?

arithmetic not "arithmetics".

Why should try to answer to a question about a claim *you*
are making and not I, stinky Maciej?

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:02:48 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 19:19:43 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> >> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
> >>> Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
> >>>
> >>>> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
> >>>
> >>> No.
> >> You didn't realize it, but still you are.
> >>
> >>> And you?
> >>
> >> Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)
> >
> > And your definition of a "theory" in the terms
> > of Peano arithmetics is ...?
> arithmetic not "arithmetics".

Thanks, poor stinker.
>
> Why should try to answer to a question about a claim *you*
> are making and not I, stinky Maciej?

Being such an idiot, you claim that Godel's theorem
is a part of Peano arithmetic [with FOL]. So it must be
written in the language of PA [with FOL]. So, how
do you define a "theory" in this language, poor stinker?

Stinky Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:02:48 UTC+1, Python wrote:
>> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 19:19:43 UTC+1, Python wrote:
>>>> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
>>>>> Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>> You didn't realize it, but still you are.
>>>>
>>>>> And you?
>>>>
>>>> Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)
>>>
>>> And your definition of a "theory" in the terms
>>> of Peano arithmetics is ...?
>> arithmetic not "arithmetics".
>
> Thanks, poor stinker.
>>
>> Why should try to answer to a question about a claim *you*
>> are making and not I, stinky Maciej?
>
> Being such an idiot, you claim that Godel's theorem
> is a part of Peano arithmetic [with FOL]. So it must be
> written in the language of PA [with FOL]. So, how
> do you define a "theory" in this language

Your initial question was "Or maybe - are you able to say what
the axioms of the (theory in which Godel theorems hold) are?"

is even more idiotic as I thought (especially "the" in front of
theory). You really don't know at all what this is about, right?

again I'm paid to teach this stuff to *students* not to senile
drunk cranks shitting their pants in an asylum in Poland.

BTW, could you be specific about which assumptions "Gödel forgot to
specify?" as you pretend?

> poor stinker

Nice signature Maciej.

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:40:23 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> Stinky Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 20:02:48 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> >> Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 19:19:43 UTC+1, Python wrote:
> >>>> Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:
> >>>>> Le 19/02/2022 à 14:59, Python a écrit :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Did you realize that you were in bad posture, so you need diversion?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No.
> >>>> You didn't realize it, but still you are.
> >>>>
> >>>>> And you?
> >>>>
> >>>> Quite not. I stand with tau = (c/a)arcsinh(at/c)
> >>>
> >>> And your definition of a "theory" in the terms
> >>> of Peano arithmetics is ...?
> >> arithmetic not "arithmetics".
> >
> > Thanks, poor stinker.
> >>
> >> Why should try to answer to a question about a claim *you*
> >> are making and not I, stinky Maciej?
> >
> > Being such an idiot, you claim that Godel's theorem
> > is a part of Peano arithmetic [with FOL]. So it must be
> > written in the language of PA [with FOL]. So, how
> > do you define a "theory" in this language
> Your initial question was "Or maybe - are you able to say what
> the axioms of the (theory in which Godel theorems hold) are?"
>
> is even more idiotic as I thought (especially "the" in front of
> theory). You really don't know at all what this is about, right?
>
> again I'm paid to teach this stuff to *students* not to senile

Too bad for your *students*, poor stinker. And your
definition of a "theory" in the terms of Peano
arithmetic [with FOL] is ...?