Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

"I DO want your money, because god wants your money!" -- The Reverend Jimmy, from _Repo_Man_


tech / sci.physics.relativity / Re: Annotated version of SRT

SubjectAuthor
* Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
+* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
|+- Re: Annotated version of SRTEvodio Bayon
|`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| +* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | +* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | | +- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | | `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |  `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |   +* Re: Annotated version of SRTPython
| | |   |+- Re: Annotated version of SRTMaciej Wozniak
| | |   |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |   | `- Re: Annotated version of SRTVance Rera
| | |   `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |    `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |     `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |      +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMaciej Wozniak
| | |      |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |      | `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |      |  `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |      `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |       `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        +- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |        +* Re: Annotated version of SRTRichie Cruze
| | |        |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |        | `* Re: Annotated version of SRTRichie Cruze
| | |        |  +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |        |  |`- Re: Annotated version of SRTRichie Cruze
| | |        |  `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        |   `* Re: Annotated version of SRTRichie Cruze
| | |        |    `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        |     `* Re: Annotated version of SRTElmer Joss
| | |        |      `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        |       `* Re: Annotated version of SRTVance Rera
| | |        |        `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        |         `* Re: Annotated version of SRTVance Rera
| | |        |          `* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |        |           +* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testHagan Koon
| | |        |           |+* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testJanPB
| | |        |           ||+- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testLamar Main
| | |        |           ||`* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testPaul Alsing
| | |        |           || +* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testMichael Moroney
| | |        |           || |+- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testwhodat
| | |        |           || |`* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testJanPB
| | |        |           || | +- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testMichael Moroney
| | |        |           || | +- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testLamar Main
| | |        |           || | `- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testJanPB
| | |        |           || `- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testLamar Main
| | |        |           |`* Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testJanPB
| | |        |           | `- Re: Annotated nazi excrement JanPB failed the eugenicist IQ-testLamar Main
| | |        |           `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |        `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         +- Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         +* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | +* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         | |`- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | `* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |  `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         |   +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         |   |`- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         |   `* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |    `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         |     `* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |      +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMaciej Wozniak
| | |         |      |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |      | `- Re: Annotated version of SRTMaciej Wozniak
| | |         |      `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         |       `* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         |        `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | +- Re: Annotated version of SRTJ. J. Lodder
| | |         | +* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         | |+* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | ||+* Re: Annotated version of SRTJ. J. Lodder
| | |         | |||`* Re: Annotated version of SRTMaciej Wozniak
| | |         | ||| `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | ||+* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         | |||`* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         | ||| `* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         | |||  `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | |||   +* Re: Annotated version of SRTOdd Bodkin
| | |         | |||   |`- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | |||   `* Re: Annotated version of SRTMitch Yamaguchi
| | |         | |||    +- Re: Annotated version of SRTthor stoneman
| | |         | |||    `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | ||`* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         | || +* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || |+* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || ||`* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         | || || `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || ||  `- Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         | || |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         | || | `* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || |  +* Re: Annotated version of SRTJanPB
| | |         | || |  |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || |  | +* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         | || |  | |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || |  | `- Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | || |  `* Re: Annotated version of SRTPython
| | |         | || `* Re: Annotated version of SRTCoke Hishikawa
| | |         | |`* Re: Annotated version of SRTThomas Heger
| | |         | `- Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney
| | |         +- Re: Annotated version of SRTPaul B. Andersen
| | |         `- Re: Annotated version of SRTJ. J. Lodder
| | `- Re: Annotated version of SRTMikko
| `* Re: Annotated version of SRTMikko
+- Re: Annotated version of SRTPaparios
+- Re: Annotated version of SRTDono.
`* Re: Annotated version of SRTMichael Moroney

Pages:123456789101112131415161718
Re: Annotated version of SRT

<c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89407&group=sci.physics.relativity#89407

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:c16:b0:69f:b1e0:e452 with SMTP id l22-20020a05620a0c1600b0069fb1e0e452mr2896965qki.152.1651212957308;
Thu, 28 Apr 2022 23:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1a92:b0:2f3:6453:138e with SMTP id
s18-20020a05622a1a9200b002f36453138emr19557915qtc.446.1651212957179; Thu, 28
Apr 2022 23:15:57 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2022 23:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com>
<jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net> <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:15:57 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:15 UTC

On Thursday, 28 April 2022 at 18:44:08 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> > Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
> >> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
> >>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
> >>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> throughout.
> >>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For the *light source*.
> >>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [quote]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
> >>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
> >>>>> the coordinates, ..."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [/quote]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
> >>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
> >>>>
> >>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
> >>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
> >>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
> >>>
> >>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
> >>
> >> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
> >> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
> >>
> >> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
> >>
> >> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
> >> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
> >>
> >> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
> >
> >
> > You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
> > author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
> > develop, what actually the author should have written.
> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s. In the same
> way, you could purchase an airplane if you chose to, and you could mow your
> back yard to have a landing strip. If you got into the airplane and tried
> to fly it without being a trained pilot, your ensuing crash and death would
> not be laid at the feet of the airplane maker.

The insane mumble of Giant Guru is for chosen ones,
for the elite, like Bod. Sure.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89408&group=sci.physics.relativity#89408

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 08:22:11 +0200
Lines: 104
Message-ID: <jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com> <jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net> <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net V+L7kEstQWlYGWkmFXZW0QWr5PCg9tqdCyVJzxkVN6l5j2oj/o
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ge9STLBHbduH4/cIFv5TUF78hr8=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
 by: Thomas Heger - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:22 UTC

Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>
>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>
>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>
>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>
>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>
>>
>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>
> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.

No

A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.

Hence anybody can read scientific papers, if he likes to do that.

The author is not required to provide the necessry knowledge to
understand the paper. But it is important, that at least scientists from
the field are able to understand, what the author tries to say.

For scientific papers we have certain requirements. These requirements
are a topic, all students have to learn, because they are requested to
deliver their own papers according to these rules.

Now Einstein's paper follows none of these rules.

Instead his paper is so terible crappy, that absolutely nobody can find
out, what he actually meant.

He violated so many rules, that it is hard to believe, that is was
printed at all.

Simple rules require definitions of variables, consistent names of the
variables and distinction of different types of mathematical objects by
visible signs.

Also logical errors are not allowed and of course no mathematical.

Formal standards require a logical structure of the text, which is
represented by the structure of the chapters.

But even this very simple requirement was violated, because the first
piece of text has no headline and does not belong to any chapter.

So, the text is overall just terrible and a student, who dared to
present that as a homework would have been kicked out of university.

TH

....

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89412&group=sci.physics.relativity#89412

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!7a25jG6pUKCqa0zKnKnvdg.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: pyt...@example.invalid (Python)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 14:30:55 +0200
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com>
<jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net>
<dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="8794"; posting-host="7a25jG6pUKCqa0zKnKnvdg.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Content-Language: fr
 by: Python - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:30 UTC

Demented ranting senile filthy dog, Maciej Wozniak barfed:
....
> The insane mumble of Giant Guru is for chosen ones,
> for the elite, like Bod. Sure.

In a way, Wozny, compared to *you* everyone is a member of the elite.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89415&group=sci.physics.relativity#89415

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:52:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net>
<dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="32892"; posting-host="Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8CqxZUIN0aa7H09Sr1H5rqmsBAk=
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Odd Bodkin - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 12:52 UTC

Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>>
>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>
>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>
>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>
>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>
>>>
>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>
>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
>
> No
>
> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.

No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
off basis.
A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
the target audience is the general public.
Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
understand it.

Don’t be silly about this.

Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
by the author about his audience do not apply to you.

This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
course of study.

You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.

>
> Hence anybody can read scientific papers, if he likes to do that.
>
> The author is not required to provide the necessry knowledge to
> understand the paper. But it is important, that at least scientists from
> the field are able to understand, what the author tries to say.
>
> For scientific papers we have certain requirements. These requirements
> are a topic, all students have to learn, because they are requested to
> deliver their own papers according to these rules.
>
> Now Einstein's paper follows none of these rules.
>
> Instead his paper is so terible crappy, that absolutely nobody can find
> out, what he actually meant.
>
> He violated so many rules, that it is hard to believe, that is was
> printed at all.
>
> Simple rules require definitions of variables, consistent names of the
> variables and distinction of different types of mathematical objects by
> visible signs.
>
> Also logical errors are not allowed and of course no mathematical.
>
> Formal standards require a logical structure of the text, which is
> represented by the structure of the chapters.
>
> But even this very simple requirement was violated, because the first
> piece of text has no headline and does not belong to any chapter.
>
> So, the text is overall just terrible and a student, who dared to
> present that as a homework would have been kicked out of university.
>
> TH
>
>
> ...
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<t4gnsm$1cep$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89416&group=sci.physics.relativity#89416

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:06:30 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4gnsm$1cep$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="45529"; posting-host="Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:2bEvEf6EINhJaVopY5PN5t0nkHI=
 by: Odd Bodkin - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:06 UTC

Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>>
>>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
>>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
>>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
>>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
>>
>> No
>>
>> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
>
> No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
> off basis.
> A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
> the target audience is the general public.
> Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
> obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
> understand it.
>
> Don’t be silly about this.
>
> Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
> undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
> are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
> of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
> into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
> will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
> by the author about his audience do not apply to you.

As a good example, I just walked up to my bookshelf and pulled down a book
aimed at the graduate student or professional researcher. It starts off in
the VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH by writing down a Lagrangian for the
electromagnetic interaction. He does not explain what a Lagrangian is or
what it is for, and he does not explain what the variables are in the
action. He does this because he appropriately expects his readers to
instantly recognize it, after having at least year or so of working
practice with it. This is implicit in the targeted level of the book.

>
> This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
> the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
> time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
> their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
> course of study.
>
> You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
> resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
> your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
> purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.
>
>>
>> Hence anybody can read scientific papers, if he likes to do that.
>>
>> The author is not required to provide the necessry knowledge to
>> understand the paper. But it is important, that at least scientists from
>> the field are able to understand, what the author tries to say.
>>
>> For scientific papers we have certain requirements. These requirements
>> are a topic, all students have to learn, because they are requested to
>> deliver their own papers according to these rules.
>>
>> Now Einstein's paper follows none of these rules.
>>
>> Instead his paper is so terible crappy, that absolutely nobody can find
>> out, what he actually meant.
>>
>> He violated so many rules, that it is hard to believe, that is was
>> printed at all.
>>
>> Simple rules require definitions of variables, consistent names of the
>> variables and distinction of different types of mathematical objects by
>> visible signs.
>>
>> Also logical errors are not allowed and of course no mathematical.
>>
>> Formal standards require a logical structure of the text, which is
>> represented by the structure of the chapters.
>>
>> But even this very simple requirement was violated, because the first
>> piece of text has no headline and does not belong to any chapter.
>>
>> So, the text is overall just terrible and a student, who dared to
>> present that as a homework would have been kicked out of university.
>>
>> TH
>>
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<bbc30874-a422-4f2c-9a76-c675d95b0b34n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89418&group=sci.physics.relativity#89418

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4b:b0:2f3:9113:695b with SMTP id y11-20020a05622a004b00b002f39113695bmr4550177qtw.537.1651239927367;
Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4b:b0:2f3:9113:695b with SMTP id
y11-20020a05622a004b00b002f39113695bmr4550166qtw.537.1651239927223; Fri, 29
Apr 2022 06:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com>
<jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net> <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com>
<t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bbc30874-a422-4f2c-9a76-c675d95b0b34n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:45:27 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 14
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:45 UTC

On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 14:30:55 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Demented ranting senile filthy dog, Maciej Wozniak barfed:
> ...
> > The insane mumble of Giant Guru is for chosen ones,
> > for the elite, like Bod. Sure.
> In a way, Wozny, compared to *you* everyone is a member of the elite.

Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
and trying to pretend he knows something.
Tell me, poor stinker, what is your definition of
a "theory" in the terms of Peano arithmetic?
See: if a theorem is going to be a part of a theory,
it has to be formulable in the language of the
theory. Do you get it? Or are you too stupid even for
that, poor stinker?

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<45c967e1-5ed8-43a3-a398-a9f329863490n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89419&group=sci.physics.relativity#89419

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5f13:0:b0:2f1:f414:e037 with SMTP id x19-20020ac85f13000000b002f1f414e037mr27095592qta.257.1651240065825;
Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:76a:b0:456:4fd4:dcd6 with SMTP id
f10-20020a056214076a00b004564fd4dcd6mr10336354qvz.41.1651240065650; Fri, 29
Apr 2022 06:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 06:47:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <t4gnsm$1cep$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com>
<jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org> <t4gnsm$1cep$1@gioia.aioe.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <45c967e1-5ed8-43a3-a398-a9f329863490n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:47:45 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 126
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:47 UTC

On Friday, 29 April 2022 at 15:06:33 UTC+2, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Odd Bodkin <bodk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> >> Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> >>> Thomas Heger <ttt...@web.de> wrote:
> >>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
> >>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
> >>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
> >>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
> >>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [quote]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
> >>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
> >>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [/quote]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
> >>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
> >>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
> >>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
> >>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
> >>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
> >>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
> >>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
> >>>
> >>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
> >>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
> >>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
> >>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s..
> >>
> >> No
> >>
> >> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
> >
> > No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
> > off basis.
> > A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
> > the target audience is the general public.
> > Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
> > obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
> > understand it.
> >
> > Don’t be silly about this.
> >
> > Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
> > undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
> > are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
> > of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
> > into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
> > will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
> > by the author about his audience do not apply to you.
> As a good example, I just walked up to my bookshelf and pulled down a book
> aimed at the graduate student or professional researcher. It starts off in
> the VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH by writing down a Lagrangian for the
> electromagnetic interaction. He does not explain what a Lagrangian is or
> what it is for, and he does not explain what the variables are in the
> action.

But he knows what it is and is consistent with its definition.
In opposition to your idiot guru; his mumble is inconsistent
with basic definitions in 1905 valid also in your moronic
physics.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89463&group=sci.physics.relativity#89463

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:240e:b0:69f:6ab:4cd9 with SMTP id d14-20020a05620a240e00b0069f06ab4cd9mr1645448qkn.462.1651290706224;
Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:9bd6:0:b0:69f:805e:d1a1 with SMTP id
d205-20020a379bd6000000b0069f805ed1a1mr1585006qke.404.1651290705984; Fri, 29
Apr 2022 20:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=162.195.247.210; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.195.247.210
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net>
<dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 03:51:46 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 189
 by: JanPB - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 03:51 UTC

On Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 11:08:58 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 28.04.2022 um 10:45 schrieb JanPB:
> > On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 10:14:03 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
> >>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
> >>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
> >>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> throughout.
> >>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For the *light source*.
> >>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [quote]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
> >>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
> >>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [/quote]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
> >>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
> >>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
> >>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
> >>>>
> >>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
> >>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
> >>>
> >>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
> >>>
> >>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
> >>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
> >>>
> >>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
> >> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
> >> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
> >> develop, what actually the author should have written.
> >
> > But the author has written all that. I only rewrote it.
> >
> >> Einstein himself had to write, which coordinate systems were used and
> >> for which quantities. These quantities need to be defined properly.
> >
> > They are.
> >
> >> But in contrast to common standards, we are now discussing the question,
> >> whether the mirror moves (or not) in system K.
> >
> > The mirror is stationary in k. This is obvious from the description as well as
> > from everything that went on before (e.g. the clock sync definition).
> >
> >> This is an information, an author needs to provide.
> >
> > It was provided.
> >
> >> We are now discussing this question on the basis on other constraints
> >> like other equations or descriptions in the text.
> >>
> >> But I have tried hard and found no possible setting, which violated non
> >> of these constraints somewhere.
> >
> > I've described the setting by paraphrasing he paper slightly to underline
> > the points we are discussing. There are no violations of anything there..
> In a scientific paper the author has to tell his story. It is not the
> duty of the reader to 'fill the blancs'.

Einstein told his story. The reader can fill in the blanks. The blanks are
present in every science paper (for obvious reasons).

None of it created any problems to the readers.

> But if we actually try to do that (as I did), we find self-contradicting
> requirements, which cannot be all equally fulfilled.

But that's your problem.

> Einstein wrote about an emitter at the zero spot of the moving system k,
> which sends out a ray, which is reflected by a mirror at the point x'.
>
> The only introduction of x' that can be found in the text stems from the
> equation x' =x - v*t.
>
> Now we can assume, that Einstein wanted x' to be in constant distance to
> the emitter, because otherwise the nect equation
> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
> cannot be fulfilled.
>
> But -v*t is obviously negative, while x has (apparently) a fixed value.

Consider any object at rest in the system k. Let's say at time t_0 it's at x_0
(according to K's coordinates). This means at any time t its position
x satisfies:

x = x_0 + v*(t - t_0)

This means:

x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0

IOW, the combination "x - vt" for any object at rest in k is *constant*
(since the RHS is independent of time).

Note that x_0 = v*t_0 (because the light source is at the origin of k and
the origins of K and k coincide when t = 0).

Therefore, for the light source, its position x at time t always
satisfies:

x - v*t = 0

Einstein denotes x - v*t by x'.

The mirror sits some distance D away from the origin of k. So at time
t_0 its position is x_0 + D. So at any time t its position x satisfies:

x = x_0 + D + v*(t - t_0)

This means:

x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0 + D = D (since x_0 = v*t_0)

Again, x - vt is constant. Einstein uses the variable name x' to denote
this constant instead of inventing a new letter (as I did above).

> >> Now we had to declare this an error of the text and not ours, because we
> >> already did, what no author could rightfully demand, and tried to read
> >> the authors mind from rare hints, but with no success.
> >
> > I understand that it must be frustrating but Einstein made no errors in that paper.
> >
> You can declare wrong to be right, if you like to do so.

There is nothing wrong here.

> But this would contradict a very important axiom is science:
> that wrong statements are bad in science.

Sure. But there are no wrong statements in Einstein's 1905 paper.

--
Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<e5d5bb4a-5013-4d78-8071-8ab346f79f9dn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89465&group=sci.physics.relativity#89465

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4515:b0:69f:1986:b07d with SMTP id t21-20020a05620a451500b0069f1986b07dmr1656705qkp.458.1651291421015;
Fri, 29 Apr 2022 21:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4415:b0:69e:c048:dd87 with SMTP id
v21-20020a05620a441500b0069ec048dd87mr1680776qkp.0.1651291420889; Fri, 29 Apr
2022 21:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 21:03:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net>
<dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <e5d5bb4a-5013-4d78-8071-8ab346f79f9dn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 04:03:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 110
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 04:03 UTC

On Saturday, 30 April 2022 at 05:51:47 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
> On Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 11:08:58 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > Am 28.04.2022 um 10:45 schrieb JanPB:
> > > On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 10:14:03 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > >> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
> > >>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > >>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
> > >>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > >>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
> > >>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
> > >>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
> > >>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> throughout.
> > >>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> For the *light source*.
> > >>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [quote]
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
> > >>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
> > >>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [/quote]
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
> > >>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
> > >>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
> > >>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
> > >>>
> > >>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
> > >>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
> > >>>
> > >>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
> > >>>
> > >>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
> > >>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
> > >>>
> > >>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
> > >> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
> > >> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
> > >> develop, what actually the author should have written.
> > >
> > > But the author has written all that. I only rewrote it.
> > >
> > >> Einstein himself had to write, which coordinate systems were used and
> > >> for which quantities. These quantities need to be defined properly.
> > >
> > > They are.
> > >
> > >> But in contrast to common standards, we are now discussing the question,
> > >> whether the mirror moves (or not) in system K.
> > >
> > > The mirror is stationary in k. This is obvious from the description as well as
> > > from everything that went on before (e.g. the clock sync definition).
> > >
> > >> This is an information, an author needs to provide.
> > >
> > > It was provided.
> > >
> > >> We are now discussing this question on the basis on other constraints
> > >> like other equations or descriptions in the text.
> > >>
> > >> But I have tried hard and found no possible setting, which violated non
> > >> of these constraints somewhere.
> > >
> > > I've described the setting by paraphrasing he paper slightly to underline
> > > the points we are discussing. There are no violations of anything there.
> > In a scientific paper the author has to tell his story. It is not the
> > duty of the reader to 'fill the blancs'.
> Einstein told his story. The reader can fill in the blanks.

That we're FORCED!!! To THE BEST WAY!!! Which is,
of course, his way.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89470&group=sci.physics.relativity#89470

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:47:40 +0200
Lines: 178
Message-ID: <jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com> <jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Se3dlziUhZW9vo8TASZ0Sw8k5F4Sxu54+PXLR9VK1d6H0ZFVKh
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gxOIWyc7KCGK81yBPk7YOWTCrUg=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Thomas Heger - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 05:47 UTC

Am 30.04.2022 um 05:51 schrieb JanPB:
> On Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 11:08:58 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 28.04.2022 um 10:45 schrieb JanPB:
>>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 10:14:03 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>>
>>> But the author has written all that. I only rewrote it.
>>>
>>>> Einstein himself had to write, which coordinate systems were used and
>>>> for which quantities. These quantities need to be defined properly.
>>>
>>> They are.
>>>
>>>> But in contrast to common standards, we are now discussing the question,
>>>> whether the mirror moves (or not) in system K.
>>>
>>> The mirror is stationary in k. This is obvious from the description as well as
>>> from everything that went on before (e.g. the clock sync definition).
>>>
>>>> This is an information, an author needs to provide.
>>>
>>> It was provided.
>>>
>>>> We are now discussing this question on the basis on other constraints
>>>> like other equations or descriptions in the text.
>>>>
>>>> But I have tried hard and found no possible setting, which violated non
>>>> of these constraints somewhere.
>>>
>>> I've described the setting by paraphrasing he paper slightly to underline
>>> the points we are discussing. There are no violations of anything there.
>> In a scientific paper the author has to tell his story. It is not the
>> duty of the reader to 'fill the blancs'.
>
> Einstein told his story. The reader can fill in the blanks. The blanks are
> present in every science paper (for obvious reasons).
>
> None of it created any problems to the readers.
>
>> But if we actually try to do that (as I did), we find self-contradicting
>> requirements, which cannot be all equally fulfilled.
>
> But that's your problem.

No, not at all.

If an author required impossible actions from the reader, the author
would disqualify himself.

Selfcontradicting statements would disqualify a paper, because you
cannot possibly do things, that one statement requires and another forbids.

Such self-contradicting statements are therefore uncurable errors,
however qualified a reader is.

>> Einstein wrote about an emitter at the zero spot of the moving system k,
>> which sends out a ray, which is reflected by a mirror at the point x'.
>>
>> The only introduction of x' that can be found in the text stems from the
>> equation x' =x - v*t.
>>
>> Now we can assume, that Einstein wanted x' to be in constant distance to
>> the emitter, because otherwise the nect equation
>> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
>> cannot be fulfilled.
>>
>> But -v*t is obviously negative, while x has (apparently) a fixed value.
>
> Consider any object at rest in the system k. Let's say at time t_0 it's at x_0
> (according to K's coordinates). This means at any time t its position
> x satisfies:
>
> x = x_0 + v*(t - t_0)
>
> This means:
>
> x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0
>
> IOW, the combination "x - vt" for any object at rest in k is *constant*
> (since the RHS is independent of time).

The quantities x_0 and t_0 were not present in Einstein's text. And you
have no right to introduce, what is not there.

You need to stick to the equation x' =x - v*t, because that was, what
Einstein wrote.

The problem arises, because 'x' was introduced in this statement:

"To any system of values x, y, z, t, which completely defines the place
and time of an event in the stationary system..."

Since x is not further specified, x shall represent some arbitrary but
fixed x-coordinate in system K.

This coordinate is arbitrary but apparently not moving, hence any
x-coordinate could fulfill the requirements.

Now from this value a quantity v*t is subtracted and at that place we
find the mirror. That has a coordinate called x'.

Since the emitter is at rest at the zero spot of k, it moves to the
right, while the mirror moves to the left (the direction of smaller values).

That would double the velocity, instead of compensating movement.

Since movement was excluded by the equation
(1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1

we have only one remaining possibility: v=0 of k in respect to K

But in this case k would be equal to K and all subsequent considerations
would become trivial, hence we can also exclude the assumption v=0
between K and k.

Now we get stuck, because no possibility remains.

Therefore, the text required impossible assumptions, hence must contain
errors.

What else Einstein wrote became meaningless, because theoretical physics
does not allow errors.

TH
....

Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89475&group=sci.physics.relativity#89475

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2902:b0:69e:b906:7078 with SMTP id m2-20020a05620a290200b0069eb9067078mr2880919qkp.717.1651327212834;
Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:5cc:b0:2f3:8806:dc90 with SMTP id
d12-20020a05622a05cc00b002f38806dc90mr3443246qtb.77.1651327212401; Sat, 30
Apr 2022 07:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 07:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:647:4f80:21c0:8466:c:8577:2365;
posting-account=vma-PgoAAABrctSmMdefNKZ-c5S8buvP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:647:4f80:21c0:8466:c:8577:2365
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
From: eggy2001...@gmail.com (Dono.)
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 14:00:12 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Lines: 11
 by: Dono. - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 14:00 UTC

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:47:42 PM UTC-7, imbecile Thomas Heger wrote:

> Since movement was excluded by the equation
> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
>
> we have only one remaining possibility: v=0 of k in respect to K
>
> But in this case k would be equal to K and all subsequent considerations
> would become trivial, hence we can also exclude the assumption v=0
> between K and k.

This sort of blunders is what makes you the incurable cretin, Thomas.

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89478&group=sci.physics.relativity#89478

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net> <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: TtW9NxIL-OLKr6TDZqQX5dU4hmQ
JNTP-ThreadID: jaaflrFde2kU1@mid.individual.net
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 22 14:44:56 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.127 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="ecd8de788be4ddab849f695f146191d9b2d83648"; logging-data="2022-04-30T14:44:56Z/6854678"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 14:44 UTC

Le 30/04/2022 à 16:00, "Dono." a écrit :

> incurable cretin, Thomas.

Please don't insult.

R.H.

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<36c2ade0-dd73-4094-8523-8fd8451f4eadn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89482&group=sci.physics.relativity#89482

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:27e6:b0:456:371f:3226 with SMTP id jt6-20020a05621427e600b00456371f3226mr3358575qvb.118.1651331940792;
Sat, 30 Apr 2022 08:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4b61:0:b0:455:e0bc:9ef7 with SMTP id
m1-20020ad44b61000000b00455e0bc9ef7mr3587541qvx.112.1651331940587; Sat, 30
Apr 2022 08:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 08:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:647:4f80:21c0:8466:c:8577:2365;
posting-account=vma-PgoAAABrctSmMdefNKZ-c5S8buvP
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:647:4f80:21c0:8466:c:8577:2365
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net> <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
<CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <36c2ade0-dd73-4094-8523-8fd8451f4eadn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
From: eggy2001...@gmail.com (Dono.)
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:19:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 8
 by: Dono. - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:19 UTC

On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 7:44:59 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 30/04/2022 à 16:00, "Dono." a écrit :
>
> > incurable cretin, Thomas.
>
> Please don't insult.
>
> R.H.
It is not an insult, it is a statement of fact. It applies to you as well.

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<3REuWr2YigPRQdfK55_9fPfe_Gg@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89483&group=sci.physics.relativity#89483

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <3REuWr2YigPRQdfK55_9fPfe_Gg@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net> <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
<CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp> <36c2ade0-dd73-4094-8523-8fd8451f4eadn@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: pPpX2z3wYmOia-l1o31n0CH0zh8
JNTP-ThreadID: jaaflrFde2kU1@mid.individual.net
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=3REuWr2YigPRQdfK55_9fPfe_Gg@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 22 15:28:51 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.127 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="ecd8de788be4ddab849f695f146191d9b2d83648"; logging-data="2022-04-30T15:28:51Z/6854791"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:28 UTC

Le 30/04/2022 à 17:19, "Dono." a écrit :
> On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 7:44:59 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> Le 30/04/2022 à 16:00, "Dono." a écrit :
>>
>> > incurable cretin, Thomas.
>>
>> Please don't insult.
>>
>> R.H.

> It applies to you as well.

No comment.

R.H.

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<t4jkt0$1vj2$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89484&group=sci.physics.relativity#89484

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:33:52 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4jkt0$1vj2$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net>
<74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
<740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
<CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp>
<36c2ade0-dd73-4094-8523-8fd8451f4eadn@googlegroups.com>
<3REuWr2YigPRQdfK55_9fPfe_Gg@jntp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="65122"; posting-host="Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FzQZHM13GtbcA/Q803NizlHEuS0=
 by: Odd Bodkin - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 15:33 UTC

Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> wrote:
> Le 30/04/2022 à 17:19, "Dono." a écrit :
>> On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 7:44:59 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
>>> Le 30/04/2022 à 16:00, "Dono." a écrit :
>>>
>>>> incurable cretin, Thomas.
>>>
>>> Please don't insult.
>
>> It applies to you as well.
>
> No comment.

Except that one.

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<aAnGCROfxzGjB_NUv92DLAcEypE@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89495&group=sci.physics.relativity#89495

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <aAnGCROfxzGjB_NUv92DLAcEypE@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net> <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
<CTYhYDLsa9lYVuyy7aI01IUgQ_Y@jntp> <36c2ade0-dd73-4094-8523-8fd8451f4eadn@googlegroups.com>
<3REuWr2YigPRQdfK55_9fPfe_Gg@jntp> <t4jkt0$1vj2$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: 3gi9dCCAHn9SV4_k596zxrG4TjA
JNTP-ThreadID: jaaflrFde2kU1@mid.individual.net
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=aAnGCROfxzGjB_NUv92DLAcEypE@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 22 17:56:46 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.127 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="ecd8de788be4ddab849f695f146191d9b2d83648"; logging-data="2022-04-30T17:56:46Z/6855221"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 17:56 UTC

Le 30/04/2022 à 17:33, Odd Bodkin a écrit :
> Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> wrote:
>> Le 30/04/2022 à 17:19, "Dono." a écrit :
>>> On Saturday, April 30, 2022 at 7:44:59 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
>>>> Le 30/04/2022 à 16:00, "Dono." a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>> incurable cretin, Thomas.
>>>>
>>>> Please don't insult.
>>
>>> It applies to you as well.
>>
>> No comment.
>
>
> Except that one.

No comment.

R.H.

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

<jd5cl8Fsnj3U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89498&group=sci.physics.relativity#89498

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 20:15:07 +0200
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <jd5cl8Fsnj3U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com> <jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com> <jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net> <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net JKIcbGqKitLc0pQBUAP2uAG0M+npfWJzG7TiS0UssmrjkF8Cxf
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rQkKStimyqU/jsua7i9SHuARpPs=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <740ce8f2-b5a4-40c5-b881-c9211347b6a7n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Thomas Heger - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 18:15 UTC

Am 30.04.2022 um 16:00 schrieb Dono.:
> On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:47:42 PM UTC-7, imbecile Thomas Heger wrote:
>
>> Since movement was excluded by the equation
>> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
>>
>> we have only one remaining possibility: v=0 of k in respect to K
>>
>> But in this case k would be equal to K and all subsequent considerations
>> would become trivial, hence we can also exclude the assumption v=0
>> between K and k.
>
> This sort of blunders is what makes you the incurable cretin, Thomas.
>

I wanted to show to 'JanPB', that 'filling the blancs' would require,
that there are blancs to fill.

But Einstein's text contain constraints, which are impossible to fulfill.

IOW: there exists absolutely nothing, what JanPB could eventually
assume, what fits to all mentioned constraints.

These equations create such limitations:

1) x' = x −vt

2) (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1

3) the zero spot of k is xsi_0 and that of K is x_0

the equation between both points is:
x_0 + v*t= xsi_0

Now the question is, how x' = x −vt should be interpreted.

Unfortunately Einstein didn't say, how he meant this equation. Now JanPB
and I were discussing this issue.

JanPB wanted to apply his own logic and interpret the equation according
to the constraints mentioned in the text.

I wanted to reject this idea, because I think, an author should say,
what he wants to say and it's not the duty of the reader to marter their
brain about the intentions of the author.

But as polite as I am, I followed JanPB's argument, anyhow, despite I do
not really agree.

But I also wanted to prove, that JanPB cannot apply his method, because
there is no assumption possible, which would fulfill the requirements.

TH

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<I1Gcx4uL-KKo8XV04EOtKoOMQkc@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89510&group=sci.physics.relativity#89510

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <I1Gcx4uL-KKo8XV04EOtKoOMQkc@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com> <t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<bbc30874-a422-4f2c-9a76-c675d95b0b34n@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: qb4KLhZoSHk7Rsh7H4k2_aXrTzo
JNTP-ThreadID: jaaflrFde2kU1@mid.individual.net
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=I1Gcx4uL-KKo8XV04EOtKoOMQkc@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 22 19:50:52 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.127 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="ecd8de788be4ddab849f695f146191d9b2d83648"; logging-data="2022-04-30T19:50:52Z/6855473"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Sat, 30 Apr 2022 19:50 UTC

Le 29/04/2022 à 15:45, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,

His music will never stop.

R.H.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<000d23ad-4056-4ab4-a12a-f0145ec3f968n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89528&group=sci.physics.relativity#89528

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:9243:0:b0:69b:6009:856d with SMTP id u64-20020a379243000000b0069b6009856dmr4351794qkd.274.1651370564437;
Sat, 30 Apr 2022 19:02:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5c4c:0:b0:456:4d9e:db91 with SMTP id
a12-20020ad45c4c000000b004564d9edb91mr5062988qva.37.1651370564177; Sat, 30
Apr 2022 19:02:44 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 19:02:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=162.195.247.210; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.195.247.210
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com>
<jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
<jd40rqFkjjdU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <000d23ad-4056-4ab4-a12a-f0145ec3f968n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 02:02:44 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 237
 by: JanPB - Sun, 1 May 2022 02:02 UTC

On Friday, April 29, 2022 at 10:47:42 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 30.04.2022 um 05:51 schrieb JanPB:
> > On Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 11:08:58 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >> Am 28.04.2022 um 10:45 schrieb JanPB:
> >>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 10:14:03 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
> >>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
> >>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
> >>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
> >>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [quote]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
> >>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
> >>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> [/quote]
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
> >>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
> >>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
> >>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
> >>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
> >>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
> >>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
> >>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
> >>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
> >>>
> >>> But the author has written all that. I only rewrote it.
> >>>
> >>>> Einstein himself had to write, which coordinate systems were used and
> >>>> for which quantities. These quantities need to be defined properly.
> >>>
> >>> They are.
> >>>
> >>>> But in contrast to common standards, we are now discussing the question,
> >>>> whether the mirror moves (or not) in system K.
> >>>
> >>> The mirror is stationary in k. This is obvious from the description as well as
> >>> from everything that went on before (e.g. the clock sync definition).
> >>>
> >>>> This is an information, an author needs to provide.
> >>>
> >>> It was provided.
> >>>
> >>>> We are now discussing this question on the basis on other constraints
> >>>> like other equations or descriptions in the text.
> >>>>
> >>>> But I have tried hard and found no possible setting, which violated non
> >>>> of these constraints somewhere.
> >>>
> >>> I've described the setting by paraphrasing he paper slightly to underline
> >>> the points we are discussing. There are no violations of anything there.
> >> In a scientific paper the author has to tell his story. It is not the
> >> duty of the reader to 'fill the blancs'.
> >
> > Einstein told his story. The reader can fill in the blanks. The blanks are
> > present in every science paper (for obvious reasons).
> >
> > None of it created any problems to the readers.
> >
> >> But if we actually try to do that (as I did), we find self-contradicting
> >> requirements, which cannot be all equally fulfilled.
> >
> > But that's your problem.
> No, not at all.

Well, it is: the paper does not contain any errors.

> If an author required impossible actions from the reader, the author
> would disqualify himself.
>
> Selfcontradicting statements would disqualify a paper, because you
> cannot possibly do things, that one statement requires and another forbids.
>
> Such self-contradicting statements are therefore uncurable errors,
> however qualified a reader is.

'Tis all true but also N/A for this discussion.

> >> Einstein wrote about an emitter at the zero spot of the moving system k,
> >> which sends out a ray, which is reflected by a mirror at the point x'.
> >>
> >> The only introduction of x' that can be found in the text stems from the
> >> equation x' =x - v*t.
> >>
> >> Now we can assume, that Einstein wanted x' to be in constant distance to
> >> the emitter, because otherwise the nect equation
> >> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
> >> cannot be fulfilled.
> >>
> >> But -v*t is obviously negative, while x has (apparently) a fixed value..
> >
> > Consider any object at rest in the system k. Let's say at time t_0 it's at x_0
> > (according to K's coordinates). This means at any time t its position
> > x satisfies:
> >
> > x = x_0 + v*(t - t_0)
> >
> > This means:
> >
> > x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0
> >
> > IOW, the combination "x - vt" for any object at rest in k is *constant*
> > (since the RHS is independent of time).
> The quantities x_0 and t_0 were not present in Einstein's text.

Of course not. Why should they? Research papers are not high school textbooks.

> And you
> have no right to introduce, what is not there.

Of course I have a "right": I'm explaining something to you
that you (apparently) don't understand. The part I described was
omitted by Einstein because it's *elementary*. Scientists don't put
elementary stuff in their papers.

> You need to stick to the equation x' =x - v*t, because that was, what
> Einstein wrote.

No, that's not how science works. It's not the Bible. It's the content that
matters, not the words used to describe it.

Your attitude (treating science as a Holy Writ) has been very common
on this NG over the years.

> The problem arises, because 'x' was introduced in this statement:
>
> "To any system of values x, y, z, t, which completely defines the place
> and time of an event in the stationary system..."
>
> Since x is not further specified, x shall represent some arbitrary but
> fixed x-coordinate in system K.
>
> This coordinate is arbitrary but apparently not moving, hence any
> x-coordinate could fulfill the requirements.

(x, y, z, t) are coordinates of K. K is called "stationary".


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Annotated version of SRT

<825981de-d208-47ec-86f0-e38f0a5172afn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89533&group=sci.physics.relativity#89533

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:44ca:b0:69e:b239:5f48 with SMTP id y10-20020a05620a44ca00b0069eb2395f48mr4671346qkp.746.1651380210207;
Sat, 30 Apr 2022 21:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4b61:0:b0:455:e0bc:9ef7 with SMTP id
m1-20020ad44b61000000b00455e0bc9ef7mr5346254qvx.112.1651380210084; Sat, 30
Apr 2022 21:43:30 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 21:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <I1Gcx4uL-KKo8XV04EOtKoOMQkc@jntp>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <3fa535b9-79c6-4f6e-bb4b-80347861aaa7n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<c5157b5b-4925-4eda-bcb2-7bb5271fbf1en@googlegroups.com> <t4glps$8iq$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<bbc30874-a422-4f2c-9a76-c675d95b0b34n@googlegroups.com> <I1Gcx4uL-KKo8XV04EOtKoOMQkc@jntp>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <825981de-d208-47ec-86f0-e38f0a5172afn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 04:43:30 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Lines: 6
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Sun, 1 May 2022 04:43 UTC

On Saturday, 30 April 2022 at 21:50:55 UTC+2, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 29/04/2022 à 15:45, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>
> > Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
> His music will never stop.

We'll see.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<jd6sulF6r8bU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89538&group=sci.physics.relativity#89538

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 09:59:21 +0200
Lines: 123
Message-ID: <jd6sulF6r8bU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <jc4ii2Fit86U1@mid.individual.net> <dbe407a6-9d6b-4799-a1b8-27000eacedabn@googlegroups.com> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net> <t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net XE9onF1H/sm07Aw/8EsGMgJzADBxTu1pN55aE8P9lPaprFhxpN
Cancel-Lock: sha1:46nI8no8jDWONbAlS7gR9F6pkkM=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>
 by: Thomas Heger - Sun, 1 May 2022 07:59 UTC

Am 29.04.2022 um 14:52 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>> Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>>
>>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
>>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
>>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
>>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
>>
>> No
>>
>> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
>
> No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
> off basis.
> A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
> the target audience is the general public.
> Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
> obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
> understand it.
>
> Don’t be silly about this.
>
> Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
> undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
> are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
> of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
> into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
> will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
> by the author about his audience do not apply to you.
>
> This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
> the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
> time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
> their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
> course of study.
>
> You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
> resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
> your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
> purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.

Well, ok, 'my rules' is acceptable.

Such rules include internal consistancy, clearness of thought and
mathematical correctness.

I also would insist on certain formal criteria, because formal issues
are not just aestetic issues.

I have complained about the reuse of variable names by Einstein in his text.

That is a formal issue. But reuse of symbols would make it hard to
identify the intended meaning, without providing any benefit.

Another principle would be: variable names should follow a certain
system, which is strictly used and somehow logic.

I also would like to see a certain systematic, where the chapters are
organised, that the structure of the chapters corresponds to the content
of the text.

I personally like illustrations, because often one picture is worth more
than a thousand words (Einstein had none in his text).

TH

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<jd6tsrF70j2U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89539&group=sci.physics.relativity#89539

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Sun, 01 May 2022 10:15:27 +0200
Lines: 155
Message-ID: <jd6tsrF70j2U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <janhdiFsvsnU1@mid.individual.net> <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <53605068-fc97-464b-95c6-75eb67e219cbn@googlegroups.com> <jd1dnlF5d0qU1@mid.individual.net> <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 6ZgeQ4uZBi78GxC9HqbJqwiwqNDjQrO4HaP1cZaQAQnxT95M6B
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rDbQBkSIG7joi+fD60LITk99M/o=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <74749391-9489-4833-9e2c-b880a3e59fa0n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Thomas Heger - Sun, 1 May 2022 08:15 UTC

Am 30.04.2022 um 05:51 schrieb JanPB:
> On Thursday, April 28, 2022 at 11:08:58 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 28.04.2022 um 10:45 schrieb JanPB:
>>> On Wednesday, April 27, 2022 at 10:14:03 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up previously (in section 1).
>>>>>> The coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>>
>>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>>
>>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>>
>>> But the author has written all that. I only rewrote it.
>>>
>>>> Einstein himself had to write, which coordinate systems were used and
>>>> for which quantities. These quantities need to be defined properly.
>>>
>>> They are.
>>>
>>>> But in contrast to common standards, we are now discussing the question,
>>>> whether the mirror moves (or not) in system K.
>>>
>>> The mirror is stationary in k. This is obvious from the description as well as
>>> from everything that went on before (e.g. the clock sync definition).
>>>
>>>> This is an information, an author needs to provide.
>>>
>>> It was provided.
>>>
>>>> We are now discussing this question on the basis on other constraints
>>>> like other equations or descriptions in the text.
>>>>
>>>> But I have tried hard and found no possible setting, which violated non
>>>> of these constraints somewhere.
>>>
>>> I've described the setting by paraphrasing he paper slightly to underline
>>> the points we are discussing. There are no violations of anything there.
>> In a scientific paper the author has to tell his story. It is not the
>> duty of the reader to 'fill the blancs'.
>
> Einstein told his story. The reader can fill in the blanks. The blanks are
> present in every science paper (for obvious reasons).
>
> None of it created any problems to the readers.
>
>> But if we actually try to do that (as I did), we find self-contradicting
>> requirements, which cannot be all equally fulfilled.
>
> But that's your problem.
>
>> Einstein wrote about an emitter at the zero spot of the moving system k,
>> which sends out a ray, which is reflected by a mirror at the point x'.
>>
>> The only introduction of x' that can be found in the text stems from the
>> equation x' =x - v*t.
>>
>> Now we can assume, that Einstein wanted x' to be in constant distance to
>> the emitter, because otherwise the nect equation
>> (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1
>> cannot be fulfilled.
>>
>> But -v*t is obviously negative, while x has (apparently) a fixed value.
>
> Consider any object at rest in the system k. Let's say at time t_0 it's at x_0
> (according to K's coordinates). This means at any time t its position
> x satisfies:
>
> x = x_0 + v*(t - t_0)

No. The positions in k had the variable name 'xsi'.

If 'x' is used, that would address a coordinate in K.

x_0 and t_0 are the zero-points in time and along the x-axis of K, hence
have the numerical value zero.

For this reason we can leave them away and get
x= v*t

for what I would agree.

> This means:
>
> x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0

hence x- vt= 0

That is also ok, while trivial.

>
> IOW, the combination "x - vt" for any object at rest in k is *constant*
> (since the RHS is independent of time).

No, since 0 is not 'any object at rest in k'.

An object at rest in k (say at point xsi) is moving in K!

The movement is according to x'= xsi - vt, while Einstein wrote
x'= x- vt

This little change is what caused the trouble, because x is a coordinate
from K while xsi belongs to k.

....

TH

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<t4ltn8$18d6$1@gioia.aioe.org>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89542&group=sci.physics.relativity#89542

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: bodkin...@gmail.com (Odd Bodkin)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 12:16:40 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <t4ltn8$18d6$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net>
<c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net>
<90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net>
<t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net>
<t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com>
<jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com>
<jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com>
<jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com>
<jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org>
<jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org>
<jd6sulF6r8bU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="41382"; posting-host="Of0kprfJVVw2aVQefhvR6Q.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org";
User-Agent: NewsTap/5.5 (iPad)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:bZEEexypCwkKETmEyX9txXaMxfo=
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2
 by: Odd Bodkin - Sun, 1 May 2022 12:16 UTC

Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 29.04.2022 um 14:52 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>> Am 28.04.2022 um 18:44 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>>> Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am 27.04.2022 um 02:35 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 1:24:06 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 26.04.2022 um 08:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:02:19 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Am 25.04.2022 um 21:22 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:52:14 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Am 24.04.2022 um 10:52 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if so, x' would still be zero.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you get x' = 0 for the emitter/receiver because its location
>>>>>>>>>>>> by construction of this experimental setup satisfies x = vt at
>>>>>>>>>>>> all times t, hence the corresponding x' value is:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> x' = x - vt = 0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> throughout.
>>>>>>>>>>> Here you actually agree, that x'=0 must be true.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For the *light source*.
>>>>>>>>> No, this is wrong because Einstein had a different setting:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [quote]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ'along
>>>>>>>>> the X-axis to x' and at the time τ_1 be reflected thence to the origin of
>>>>>>>>> the coordinates, ..."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [/quote]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The system k was the moving system, hence Einstein wanted a moving
>>>>>>>>> emitter and a stationary mirror.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Both the light source and the mirror are stationary in k because that's how
>>>>>>>> the (1/2)*(tau_0 +tau_2) = tau_1 criterion has been set up
>>>>>>>> previously (in section 1).
>>>>>>> The coordinates in k had small
>>>>>>>> Greek letters as names.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore x' must be a coordinate from system K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, it's an expression involving the K coordinates. But keep in mind
>>>>>> that the following three statements are simultaneously true:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (1) x' is an expression involving K coordinates,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (2) if x' denotes the values of this expression for the mirror
>>>>>> at different times t, then x' is constant and nonzero,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (3) the mirror is stationary in k (the lower-case k).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You should keep in mind, that it is absolutely impossible, that an
>>>>> author requires from the readers, that they would marter their brain to
>>>>> develop, what actually the author should have written.
>>>>
>>>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
>>>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
>>>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
>>>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
>>>
>>> No
>>>
>>> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
>>
>> No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
>> off basis.
>> A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
>> the target audience is the general public.
>> Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
>> obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
>> understand it.
>>
>> Don’t be silly about this.
>>
>> Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
>> undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
>> are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
>> of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
>> into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
>> will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
>> by the author about his audience do not apply to you.
>>
>> This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
>> the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
>> time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
>> their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
>> course of study.
>>
>> You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
>> resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
>> your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
>> purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.
>
> Well, ok, 'my rules' is acceptable.
>
> Such rules include internal consistancy, clearness of thought and
> mathematical correctness.

Which there are no problems with in the paper, given the intended audience.

>
> I also would insist on certain formal criteria, because formal issues
> are not just aestetic issues.

These “formal issues” are not ones that physicists care about, regardless
whether you insist.

Again, the form of papers as accepted has NOTHING to do with what you would
prefer to see.

>
> I have complained about the reuse of variable names by Einstein in his text.
>
> That is a formal issue. But reuse of symbols would make it hard to
> identify the intended meaning, without providing any benefit.
>
> Another principle would be: variable names should follow a certain
> system, which is strictly used and somehow logic.
>
> I also would like to see a certain systematic, where the chapters are
> organised, that the structure of the chapters corresponds to the content
> of the text.
>
> I personally like illustrations, because often one picture is worth more
> than a thousand words (Einstein had none in his text).
>
>
> TH
>
>
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<jd9ah1Fl21cU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89583&group=sci.physics.relativity#89583

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news.szaf.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ttt_...@web.de (Thomas Heger)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 08:03:18 +0200
Lines: 80
Message-ID: <jd9ah1Fl21cU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com> <jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com> <jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net> <b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net> <03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net> <b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net> <eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net> <t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net> <t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org> <jd6sulF6r8bU1@mid.individual.net> <t4ltn8$18d6$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net 9HuBdC5mJi1KjYyO7RRGxwcsxxvO+5Nr8uaIR7eep+tuA79Mxi
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Fvl4cXYg3dDd+a6gMLbzi7gbkrM=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <t4ltn8$18d6$1@gioia.aioe.org>
 by: Thomas Heger - Mon, 2 May 2022 06:03 UTC

Am 01.05.2022 um 14:16 schrieb Odd Bodkin:

>>>>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
>>>>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
>>>>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
>>>>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
>>>>
>>>> No
>>>>
>>>> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
>>>
>>> No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
>>> off basis.
>>> A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
>>> the target audience is the general public.
>>> Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
>>> obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
>>> understand it.
>>>
>>> Don’t be silly about this.
>>>
>>> Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
>>> undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
>>> are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
>>> of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
>>> into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
>>> will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
>>> by the author about his audience do not apply to you.
>>>
>>> This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
>>> the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
>>> time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
>>> their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
>>> course of study.
>>>
>>> You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
>>> resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
>>> your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
>>> purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.
>>
>> Well, ok, 'my rules' is acceptable.
>>
>> Such rules include internal consistancy, clearness of thought and
>> mathematical correctness.
>
> Which there are no problems with in the paper, given the intended audience.
>
>
>>
>> I also would insist on certain formal criteria, because formal issues
>> are not just aestetic issues.
>
> These “formal issues” are not ones that physicists care about, regardless
> whether you insist.
>
> Again, the form of papers as accepted has NOTHING to do with what you would
> prefer to see.

Sure.

But my 'setting' was, that I took the paper in question as the homework
of a student.

And in my role as a (hypothetical) professor writing corrections, I have
to put a lot of emphasis on formal issues.

I therefore wrote comments for every single formal case which I could find.

But, to be fair, I dislike them personally, too.

If professional physicists would allow such issues as incomprehencable
statements or wrong variables in an equation, that is simply not my
concern. I don't want that!

....

TH

Re: Annotated version of SRT

<5f9b7d29-da84-4732-8a4c-69af5ed12ac3n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=89584&group=sci.physics.relativity#89584

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:59d4:0:b0:2e1:f86d:b38c with SMTP id f20-20020ac859d4000000b002e1f86db38cmr9154261qtf.285.1651473083749;
Sun, 01 May 2022 23:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:4b:b0:2f3:9113:695b with SMTP id
y11-20020a05622a004b00b002f39113695bmr9299821qtw.537.1651473083606; Sun, 01
May 2022 23:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.uzoreto.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 1 May 2022 23:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jd9ah1Fl21cU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <jc76moF3oggU1@mid.individual.net> <c54cf8a6-fc9b-4f00-8e9e-94be68ee3ef9n@googlegroups.com>
<jccdb7F3tf6U1@mid.individual.net> <90eae6e0-539d-4edd-913e-a2772b9b5ca6n@googlegroups.com>
<jcf242Fjgq4U1@mid.individual.net> <t3ub67$3ji$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<jchimgF3l9qU1@mid.individual.net> <t40a6a$17t7$1@gioia.aioe.org>
<t40i8v$e99$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jck7oqFj9orU1@mid.individual.net>
<b3816797-e144-415f-a0cc-210dfb533137n@googlegroups.com> <jcn29aF5f6dU1@mid.individual.net>
<03cc52d5-9636-485a-a9f3-7c8350619c31n@googlegroups.com> <jcpcmoFj8lpU1@mid.individual.net>
<b5b02531-42cc-4714-9799-1043df76199fn@googlegroups.com> <jcr2n2Ftcv2U1@mid.individual.net>
<eacd0116-ac91-4cea-bcd2-35aa422bf510n@googlegroups.com> <jcum4nFjnusU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4eg8l$cal$5@gioia.aioe.org> <jd1egjF5iktU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4gn2d$103s$2@gioia.aioe.org> <jd6sulF6r8bU1@mid.individual.net>
<t4ltn8$18d6$1@gioia.aioe.org> <jd9ah1Fl21cU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5f9b7d29-da84-4732-8a4c-69af5ed12ac3n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Annotated version of SRT
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Mon, 02 May 2022 06:31:23 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Mon, 2 May 2022 06:31 UTC

On Monday, 2 May 2022 at 08:03:16 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 01.05.2022 um 14:16 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>
> >>>>> Once again, Thomas, it is only up to the author to try to communicate to
> >>>>> his intended audience, which you are not a member of. This does not prevent
> >>>>> you from reading his communication to other people, but in so doing the
> >>>>> failure to communicate to you is your fault, not the author’s.
> >>>>
> >>>> No
> >>>>
> >>>> A scientific paper is called 'publication', because it address the public.
> >>>
> >>> No, Thomas, that’s just a misbegotten aspiration, an expectation that is
> >>> off basis.
> >>> A publication is opened to others to read, but that does not entail that
> >>> the target audience is the general public.
> >>> Yes, the general public might well be able to access it, but this does not
> >>> obligate the author to write the publication so that the general public can
> >>> understand it.
> >>>
> >>> Don’t be silly about this.
> >>>
> >>> Even in textbooks, graduate texts are aimed at graduate students, not
> >>> undergraduate students and certainly not the general public. Graduate texts
> >>> are specifically written with assumptions about the background familiarity
> >>> of the reader — by design and with appropriate effect. Sure, you can walk
> >>> into a university library and sit down with a graduate-level text, and you
> >>> will find that it is impenetrable, precisely because the assumptions made
> >>> by the author about his audience do not apply to you.
> >>>
> >>> This is not an attempt to form an elite. This is not an attempt to exclude
> >>> the Everyman. It is a recognition that some courses of study take a long
> >>> time of dedicated and guided work, and that the materials will change in
> >>> their scope and presentation level as the student advances through that
> >>> course of study.
> >>>
> >>> You have silly, irrational, and unshared expectations of what level
> >>> resources should be written to. These you call “rules” but they are only
> >>> your “rules” and not those endorsed by others. They would serve your
> >>> purpose, but nobody cares what your purposes are.
> >>
> >> Well, ok, 'my rules' is acceptable.
> >>
> >> Such rules include internal consistancy, clearness of thought and
> >> mathematical correctness.
> >
> > Which there are no problems with in the paper, given the intended audience.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I also would insist on certain formal criteria, because formal issues
> >> are not just aestetic issues.
> >
> > These “formal issues” are not ones that physicists care about, regardless
> > whether you insist.
> >
> > Again, the form of papers as accepted has NOTHING to do with what you would
> > prefer to see.
> Sure.
>
> But my 'setting' was, that I took the paper in question as the homework
> of a student.
>
> And in my role as a (hypothetical) professor writing corrections, I have
> to put a lot of emphasis on formal issues.
>
> I therefore wrote comments for every single formal case which I could find.
>
> But, to be fair, I dislike them personally, too.
>
> If professional physicists would allow such issues as incomprehencable
> statements or wrong variables in an equation, that is simply not my
> concern. I don't want that!

Professional physicists are totally incopetent narcists, and
making it as incomprehendable as they can is their strategy
to avoid discrediting.

Pages:123456789101112131415161718
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor