Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

An adequate bootstrap is a contradiction in terms.


tech / sci.physics.relativity / Special Relativity Fatal Error

SubjectAuthor
* Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal Errorrotchm
|+- Re: Special Relativity Fatal Errorwhodat
|`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
| +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJanPB
| `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal Errorrotchm
|  `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJanPB
|+- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
| `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Roberts
|  +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  |+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorRicardo Jimenez
|  ||`- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  |+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  ||`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  || `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  ||  `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  ||   `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Roberts
|  | +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | | +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | | |`- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | | `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | | `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |  `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |   +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |   |`- New crank? Old crank?Dono.
|  | |  | |   `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |    `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |     `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|  | |  | |      | `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      |  `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|  | |  | |      |   `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      |    `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|  | |  | |      |     `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      |      `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|  | |  | |      |       `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      |        `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJ. J. Lodder
|  | |  | |      |         `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJanPB
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | |      +* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      |`* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorRicardo Jimenez
|  | |  | |      | +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorRichard Hachel
|  | |  | |      | `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Crank Tom Capizzi perseveresDono.
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Crank Tom Capizzi perseveresTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorStan Fultoni
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Crank Tom Capizzi perseveresDono.
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Crank Tom Capizzi perseveresTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | |  | |      +- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJanPB
|  | |  | |      `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  | `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|  | |  `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  | `- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorTom Capizzi
|  `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorThomas Heger
|   `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorMaciej Wozniak
|    `* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorThomas Heger
+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorAldo
+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorSylvia Else
+* Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorThomas Heger
`- Re: Special Relativity Fatal ErrorJanPB

Pages:12345
Special Relativity Fatal Error

<b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90348&group=sci.physics.relativity#90348

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5785:0:b0:2f3:b3fd:9667 with SMTP id v5-20020ac85785000000b002f3b3fd9667mr13598511qta.382.1652665702956;
Sun, 15 May 2022 18:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:43a4:b0:6a2:e7dc:40c2 with SMTP id
a36-20020a05620a43a400b006a2e7dc40c2mr2755070qkp.404.1652665702779; Sun, 15
May 2022 18:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 18:48:22 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 01:48:22 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 7593
 by: Tom Capizzi - Mon, 16 May 2022 01:48 UTC

After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists, I finally caught his unfixable mistake. He hoisted himself with his own petard. Because I use his own words to prove his theory leads to a contradiction. I've had some crackpot skeptics try to tell me things like "Einstein didn't mean what he wrote" or "it's been tinkered with so much since he wrote it, it isn't even his anymore". In a peer-reviewed format, I would include the direct quotes and their source. For this bunch here, you can find all the source material on the internet. Just search for his books in pdf format. This is what to look for, as I paraphrase it.
Before Einstein would talk about relativity, he had words about measurement.. Each book has a slightly different emphasis, but none refute any of the others, so it is safe to assume they are all attributes. He starts with the definition of a direct measurement. It is simply placing rigid measuring rods end to end to match the ends of the distance being measured. The distance is then found by counting the rods (and fractions thereof). Nothing earthshattering there. But there is nothing relative about it either. The interval, the measuring rods and the observer are all stationary relative to each other. In order to observe any relativistic effects, the distance must be in a relatively moving frame and the observer and his measuring rods are in the relatively stationary frame. And then, the size of the effect depends on the relative velocity. Einstein describes this situation as an indirect measurement. The test for whether or not an indirect measurement is valid is whether or not it gets the same measurement as a direct measurement. (That's why we allowed the non-relative definition). All in all, reasonable propositions. But then he goes into his gedanken experiments. And all of them, as well as every experiment ever performed at fast enough relative velocity, predict that the length measurement will be contracted. A contracted measurement is by definition smaller than the direct measurement. Einstein ignored his own protocol, preferring to believe that the math had to be right, and spacetime had to conform to his expectations.
You could say it's just my opinion that this is a contradiction. Consider this. All the main points of Newtonian physics are low-speed approximations of their relativistic counterparts. Except the measurement standard, which is indeed a low-speed approximation. Einstein used it because it had worked that way for hundreds of years, because before relativity, all measurements were made in quasistatic frames. Frames whose relative velocity was so small that the relativistic correction factor was unity. As a rule of thumb, if v = c sin(tilt), the quasistatic range of velocity is basically sin(tilt) ≈ tilt. Einstein used a quasistatic protocol to analyze relativistic events. Since a quasistatic protocol is only valid for small velocities, any relativistic predictions based on this protocol are suspect.
The coup de grace is identifying the relativistic version of the protocol. It turns out that vector spaces come equipped with a protocol for determining how much two arbitrary vectors have in parallel. This operation is the Euclidean dot product. Geometrically, the dot product is the product of the magnitudes of two arbitrary vectors with the cosine of the angle between them. Normally, we would start with two arbitrary vectors, and use the Law of Cosines to find the angle. Algebraically, we could just dot multiply the elements of the two vectors. But in this application, one of the vectors is a reference unit in the static frame. The other vector is the unknown in the moving frame. But the angle between the two vectors is not arbitrary, nor does it depend on any of the vectors. We have already specified this angle by transforming to angular coordinates, v = c sin(tilt). Instead of v being a translation across the page, it is a rotation of the unknown away from its zero phase value. Velocity becomes a phase angle, and the origins of the two frames remain coincident as the velocity vector tilts away from the real axis. The setup is perfect for the dot product.
What this tells us, quite unambiguously is that no observer should EVER expect to measure more than the cosine projection of the tilt angle as defined by relative velocity. In other words, REALITY DOES NOT SHRINK. Everything about the Einstein Interpretation is wrong. And since what we measure is actually a geometric illusion, their is no contradiction, either. Each observer is viewing the same unchanging interval, but from a different angle.
In other words, if I put a unit of time or distance that I have made a direct measurement of into a frame that departs at constant velocity, what will they project through the dot product? If the velocity is slow enough, the cosine is unity and the projection agrees with the Newtonian protocol. But when relative velocity is high, the cosine can be very small. The projections of these units are the primed variables, ct' = ct cos(tilt) and r' = r cos(tilt). These are equivalent to ct = ct' sec(tilt) and r = r' sec(tilt). Given that v/c = sin(tilt), the Lorentz factor is simply γ = sec(tilt), and the equations become ct = γct' and r = γr'.. These are the Einstein equations of time dilation and length contraction, but nothing shrank. They are cosine projections of a rigid rotation into, for lack of a better term, Elsewhere. We used to think that Elsewhere was a place that we could not communicate with, because it would require faster than c signals. Turns out we can't exactly dive in headfirst, but any relativistic velocity rotates reality partially into Elsewhere. The part we can no longer see or measure, but that the co-moving observer swears is still there.
And there it is. Special relativity is a poor imitation of the dot product protocol which replaces the Einstein Interpretation. It is built into the hyperbolic trigonometry. Physics cherry-picked the real parts and discarded the rest, forcing the invention of shrinking spacetime. Relativity is just the mathematics of spacetime. No surprise that physics would "discover" a law of mathematics, put a physicist's name on it, and pretend it's now physics.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90350&group=sci.physics.relativity#90350

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:9442:0:b0:699:fd32:bc7d with SMTP id w63-20020a379442000000b00699fd32bc7dmr10693255qkd.615.1652666463889;
Sun, 15 May 2022 19:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5915:0:b0:2f3:db7f:7ad8 with SMTP id
21-20020ac85915000000b002f3db7f7ad8mr13381093qty.77.1652666463674; Sun, 15
May 2022 19:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 19:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.160.32.227; posting-account=BHsbrQoAAAANJj6HqXJ987nOEDAC1EsJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.160.32.227
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: rot...@gmail.com (rotchm)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 02:01:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1536
 by: rotchm - Mon, 16 May 2022 02:01 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> After years of rereading Einstein and
<SNIP>

Can you rephrase that in one small paragraph?
Being able to write clearly and succinctly in one small paragraph is a sign of intelligence.
So if you want us to take you seriously, present a nice short abstract here.

When it's too long and boresome like you did, it will not be read.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<jedqv1Fkc8pU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90353&group=sci.physics.relativity#90353

 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: whod...@void.nowgre.com (whodat)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 21:24:31 -0500
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <jedqv1Fkc8pU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net QoRChn4lh6o9BZ1GmANV/QWvRCSZqb8vnqIVm6QB1F9LH1qNPA
Cancel-Lock: sha1:greH151dETBklMSCv9BieQGXc1M=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>
 by: whodat - Mon, 16 May 2022 02:24 UTC

On 5/15/2022 9:01 PM, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
>> After years of rereading Einstein and
> <SNIP>
>
> Can you rephrase that in one small paragraph?
> Being able to write clearly and succinctly in one small paragraph is a sign of intelligence.
> So if you want us to take you seriously, present a nice short abstract here.
>
> When it's too long and boresome like you did, it will not be read.

Are you saying you have a short attention span?

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90354&group=sci.physics.relativity#90354

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4488:b0:6a0:2aab:a736 with SMTP id x8-20020a05620a448800b006a02aaba736mr11290646qkp.717.1652668493083;
Sun, 15 May 2022 19:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7c49:0:b0:2f3:db67:25d4 with SMTP id
o9-20020ac87c49000000b002f3db6725d4mr13501632qtv.336.1652668492877; Sun, 15
May 2022 19:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 15 May 2022 19:34:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 02:34:53 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2199
 by: Tom Capizzi - Mon, 16 May 2022 02:34 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:01:05 PM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> > After years of rereading Einstein and
> <SNIP>
>
> Can you rephrase that in one small paragraph?
> Being able to write clearly and succinctly in one small paragraph is a sign of intelligence.
> So if you want us to take you seriously, present a nice short abstract here.
>
> When it's too long and boresome like you did, it will not be read.
That's funny. I thought I had trimmed it as much as possible without losing relevant information. Any more and I would invite criticism that my proposition doesn't have enough documentation. So, the answer is no. If it is just too much trouble to read all those words, then I guess I can do without your feedback. I'm not asking to be taken seriously by this forum. I'm making an announcement. You want to ignore me? It's your loss.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90367&group=sci.physics.relativity#90367

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:28c7:b0:6a0:5de3:e6 with SMTP id l7-20020a05620a28c700b006a05de300e6mr11876704qkp.464.1652690823064;
Mon, 16 May 2022 01:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:311:b0:2f3:ddb0:4ae6 with SMTP id
q17-20020a05622a031100b002f3ddb04ae6mr14444729qtw.140.1652690822819; Mon, 16
May 2022 01:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 01:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=162.195.247.210; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.195.247.210
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 08:47:03 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1323
 by: JanPB - Mon, 16 May 2022 08:47 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 6:48:24 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists,

Sigh. Yet another crackpot.

--
Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<1ps1ouc.1hwehooft9wxiN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90368&group=sci.physics.relativity#90368

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 11:31:44 +0200
Organization: De Ster
Lines: 15
Message-ID: <1ps1ouc.1hwehooft9wxiN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: jjlax32@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="fb79462ce26107fb798e433fd6822c23";
logging-data="18477"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19iLzEP4s5MZGn4SgyzQs/IblK4rmTfFf8="
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.10.5)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZUacXIjWz5ccmvOHFhq0Vz5+zFw=
 by: J. J. Lodder - Mon, 16 May 2022 09:31 UTC

JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 6:48:24 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> > After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists,
>
> Sigh. Yet another crackpot.

Well, he did discover that:

>>> "Relativity is just the mathematics of spacetime."

If only he could follow up on that...

Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<76165f6d-80ef-4a00-8e3f-331e898dd19cn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90392&group=sci.physics.relativity#90392

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5ad4:0:b0:2f3:e0fb:df1c with SMTP id d20-20020ac85ad4000000b002f3e0fbdf1cmr17073886qtd.267.1652738051734;
Mon, 16 May 2022 14:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:9c08:0:b0:45a:a2a1:62e4 with SMTP id
v8-20020a0c9c08000000b0045aa2a162e4mr17284361qve.114.1652738051476; Mon, 16
May 2022 14:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 14:54:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=162.195.247.210; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 162.195.247.210
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com> <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <76165f6d-80ef-4a00-8e3f-331e898dd19cn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:54:11 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2493
 by: JanPB - Mon, 16 May 2022 21:54 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 7:34:54 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:01:05 PM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 9:48:24 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > After years of rereading Einstein and
> > <SNIP>
> >
> > Can you rephrase that in one small paragraph?
> > Being able to write clearly and succinctly in one small paragraph is a sign of intelligence.
> > So if you want us to take you seriously, present a nice short abstract here.
> >
> > When it's too long and boresome like you did, it will not be read.
> That's funny. I thought I had trimmed it as much as possible without losing relevant information. Any more and I would invite criticism that my proposition doesn't have enough documentation. So, the answer is no. If it is just too much trouble to read all those words, then I guess I can do without your feedback. I'm not asking to be taken seriously by this forum. I'm making an announcement. You want to ignore me? It's your loss.

It's a worthless announcement with no loss suffered by not reading it.

Bottom line is your entire post is not even wrong.

--
Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<486fbc7d-7ae8-45be-8576-800a451af571n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90393&group=sci.physics.relativity#90393

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:59d4:0:b0:2f3:d13b:24e5 with SMTP id f20-20020ac859d4000000b002f3d13b24e5mr17078500qtf.58.1652738898782;
Mon, 16 May 2022 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5b04:0:b0:2f3:ec8f:1b0a with SMTP id
m4-20020ac85b04000000b002f3ec8f1b0amr17214448qtw.327.1652738898484; Mon, 16
May 2022 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2806:10a6:8:c904:d2ea:9f24:f120:606f;
posting-account=CAffbAoAAABftV8s4gpuMl8C8DD0LegA
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2806:10a6:8:c904:d2ea:9f24:f120:606f
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <486fbc7d-7ae8-45be-8576-800a451af571n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: aldo.may...@cap.edu.mx (Aldo)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 22:08:18 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 8055
 by: Aldo - Mon, 16 May 2022 22:08 UTC

El domingo, 15 de mayo de 2022 a las 20:48:24 UTC-5, tgca...@gmail.com escribió:
> After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists, I finally caught his unfixable mistake. He hoisted himself with his own petard. Because I use his own words to prove his theory leads to a contradiction. I've had some crackpot skeptics try to tell me things like "Einstein didn't mean what he wrote" or "it's been tinkered with so much since he wrote it, it isn't even his anymore". In a peer-reviewed format, I would include the direct quotes and their source. For this bunch here, you can find all the source material on the internet. Just search for his books in pdf format. This is what to look for, as I paraphrase it.
> Before Einstein would talk about relativity, he had words about measurement. Each book has a slightly different emphasis, but none refute any of the others, so it is safe to assume they are all attributes. He starts with the definition of a direct measurement. It is simply placing rigid measuring rods end to end to match the ends of the distance being measured. The distance is then found by counting the rods (and fractions thereof). Nothing earthshattering there. But there is nothing relative about it either. The interval, the measuring rods and the observer are all stationary relative to each other. In order to observe any relativistic effects, the distance must be in a relatively moving frame and the observer and his measuring rods are in the relatively stationary frame. And then, the size of the effect depends on the relative velocity. Einstein describes this situation as an indirect measurement. The test for whether or not an indirect measurement is valid is whether or not it gets the same measurement as a direct measurement. (That's why we allowed the non-relative definition). All in all, reasonable propositions. But then he goes into his gedanken experiments. And all of them, as well as every experiment ever performed at fast enough relative velocity, predict that the length measurement will be contracted. A contracted measurement is by definition smaller than the direct measurement. Einstein ignored his own protocol, preferring to believe that the math had to be right, and spacetime had to conform to his expectations.
> You could say it's just my opinion that this is a contradiction. Consider this. All the main points of Newtonian physics are low-speed approximations of their relativistic counterparts. Except the measurement standard, which is indeed a low-speed approximation. Einstein used it because it had worked that way for hundreds of years, because before relativity, all measurements were made in quasistatic frames. Frames whose relative velocity was so small that the relativistic correction factor was unity. As a rule of thumb, if v = c sin(tilt), the quasistatic range of velocity is basically sin(tilt) ≈ tilt. Einstein used a quasistatic protocol to analyze relativistic events. Since a quasistatic protocol is only valid for small velocities, any relativistic predictions based on this protocol are suspect.
> The coup de grace is identifying the relativistic version of the protocol.. It turns out that vector spaces come equipped with a protocol for determining how much two arbitrary vectors have in parallel. This operation is the Euclidean dot product. Geometrically, the dot product is the product of the magnitudes of two arbitrary vectors with the cosine of the angle between them. Normally, we would start with two arbitrary vectors, and use the Law of Cosines to find the angle. Algebraically, we could just dot multiply the elements of the two vectors. But in this application, one of the vectors is a reference unit in the static frame. The other vector is the unknown in the moving frame. But the angle between the two vectors is not arbitrary, nor does it depend on any of the vectors. We have already specified this angle by transforming to angular coordinates, v = c sin(tilt). Instead of v being a translation across the page, it is a rotation of the unknown away from its zero phase value. Velocity becomes a phase angle, and the origins of the two frames remain coincident as the velocity vector tilts away from the real axis. The setup is perfect for the dot product.
> What this tells us, quite unambiguously is that no observer should EVER expect to measure more than the cosine projection of the tilt angle as defined by relative velocity. In other words, REALITY DOES NOT SHRINK. Everything about the Einstein Interpretation is wrong. And since what we measure is actually a geometric illusion, their is no contradiction, either. Each observer is viewing the same unchanging interval, but from a different angle.
> In other words, if I put a unit of time or distance that I have made a direct measurement of into a frame that departs at constant velocity, what will they project through the dot product? If the velocity is slow enough, the cosine is unity and the projection agrees with the Newtonian protocol. But when relative velocity is high, the cosine can be very small. The projections of these units are the primed variables, ct' = ct cos(tilt) and r' = r cos(tilt). These are equivalent to ct = ct' sec(tilt) and r = r' sec(tilt). Given that v/c = sin(tilt), the Lorentz factor is simply γ = sec(tilt), and the equations become ct = γct' and r = γr'. These are the Einstein equations of time dilation and length contraction, but nothing shrank. They are cosine projections of a rigid rotation into, for lack of a better term, Elsewhere. We used to think that Elsewhere was a place that we could not communicate with, because it would require faster than c signals. Turns out we can't exactly dive in headfirst, but any relativistic velocity rotates reality partially into Elsewhere. The part we can no longer see or measure, but that the co-moving observer swears is still there.
> And there it is. Special relativity is a poor imitation of the dot product protocol which replaces the Einstein Interpretation. It is built into the hyperbolic trigonometry. Physics cherry-picked the real parts and discarded the rest, forcing the invention of shrinking spacetime. Relativity is just the mathematics of spacetime. No surprise that physics would "discover" a law of mathematics, put a physicist's name on it, and pretend it's now physics.
TL;DR
Your rant is useless gibberish.You're nothing more than a poor crank, and instead should go and actually learn physics, or get another hobby.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<d9e9a6b0-6540-49ba-9820-6c0f83333ab9n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90396&group=sci.physics.relativity#90396

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:16c2:b0:69f:ca37:f6b5 with SMTP id a2-20020a05620a16c200b0069fca37f6b5mr14852879qkn.48.1652741519813;
Mon, 16 May 2022 15:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:290:b0:2f3:b28d:22a with SMTP id
z16-20020a05622a029000b002f3b28d022amr17582472qtw.446.1652741519663; Mon, 16
May 2022 15:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 15:51:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.160.32.227; posting-account=BHsbrQoAAAANJj6HqXJ987nOEDAC1EsJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.160.32.227
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com> <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d9e9a6b0-6540-49ba-9820-6c0f83333ab9n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: rot...@gmail.com (rotchm)
Injection-Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 22:51:59 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2084
 by: rotchm - Mon, 16 May 2022 22:51 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:34:54 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:01:05 PM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:

> That's funny. I thought I had trimmed it as much as possible

It can be trim to 20% of its current size easily, and formatted in a way that it is Pleasant to read and follow.
If you can't do that, it shows that you are limited and do not belong in this news group.

> Any more and I would invite criticism

You already done "too much more". You need to trim it at least to 20% of its current size.

> If it is just too much trouble to read all those words, then I guess I can do without your feedback.

My feedback has warned you that it will not be read. That is what everyone is telling you, that they are not reading it.
Heed my feedback, and it will be read.

Start over...

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<80d71cb9-548c-4cb5-b0a4-694ec1c8a608n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90467&group=sci.physics.relativity#90467

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5bd0:0:b0:2f3:bb55:4612 with SMTP id b16-20020ac85bd0000000b002f3bb554612mr22959573qtb.391.1652853816529;
Tue, 17 May 2022 23:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5909:0:b0:2f3:d35f:cb8e with SMTP id
9-20020ac85909000000b002f3d35fcb8emr22963170qty.569.1652853816301; Tue, 17
May 2022 23:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Tue, 17 May 2022 23:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <d9e9a6b0-6540-49ba-9820-6c0f83333ab9n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<c1d53461-b74a-4575-b2f4-8a59a6d6cee9n@googlegroups.com> <59bc8015-0ae0-4a12-b3de-d3d9db18874dn@googlegroups.com>
<d9e9a6b0-6540-49ba-9820-6c0f83333ab9n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <80d71cb9-548c-4cb5-b0a4-694ec1c8a608n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 06:03:36 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 3836
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 18 May 2022 06:03 UTC

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 6:52:01 PM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:34:54 PM UTC-4, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 10:01:05 PM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
>
>
> > That's funny. I thought I had trimmed it as much as possible
> It can be trim to 20% of its current size easily, and formatted in a way that it is Pleasant to read and follow.
> If you can't do that, it shows that you are limited and do not belong in this news group.
> > Any more and I would invite criticism
> You already done "too much more". You need to trim it at least to 20% of its current size.
> > If it is just too much trouble to read all those words, then I guess I can do without your feedback.
> My feedback has warned you that it will not be read. That is what everyone is telling you, that they are not reading it.
> Heed my feedback, and it will be read.
>
> Start over...

I am not swayed by your objections. It obviously took me much longer to write than it would take you to read it. If you think it's gibberish, I assure you it is because you don't understand it. And a crack like that is useless. If something really needed refinement, point it out. Then I can explain how you or I got it wrong. I will not be bullied by amateur censors. This crowd thrives on the ad hominem attacks, because that's all they have got. Nevertheless, there are grains of truth in the nonsense. These help me to focus my argument to avoid misunderstandings, so even your childish taunts have a useful side effect. By the way, this isn't the only forum I use. The level of the conversation is higher and less objectionable, but here the comments are more abundant, less relevant, but ...

So, here's the deal. I'm not going to rewrite the post to massage your egos.. If it is too long (don't make me laugh, I've read posts here) or too unfamiliar, try one paragraph at a time. We can take it sentence by sentence, if you want. But most of it is paraphrased from an assortment of sources, all of which can be found in any book store, some on the internet. I would be happy to respond to serious questions, but don't bother gaslighting me.

Here is a partial list of terms you might want to become more familiar with:
asymptote
eigenvalue
eigenvector
gudermannian
hyperbolic trigonometry
inner or dot product
isomorphism
rapidity
tilt as gudermannian of rapidity

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90484&group=sci.physics.relativity#90484

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.mixmin.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 10:36:33 +1000
Lines: 9
Message-ID: <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net A+MTosWzyVVUbfpx/8UUPAy0Mh7p5MUbZLi6btzogS46pAr8gZ
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GDI7ScGZn0DBdbujx1IM7XgcPvg=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Sylvia Else - Thu, 19 May 2022 00:36 UTC

On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:

<snipped due to binary content, apparently>

Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
deniers. Yet relativity is answering the question "what result will I
get if I measure using my usual tools?" And it does that very well.

Sylvia.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<a41b3fff-6b88-4084-9a02-571553cf003an@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90490&group=sci.physics.relativity#90490

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:13cd:b0:6a3:27ce:7baf with SMTP id g13-20020a05620a13cd00b006a327ce7bafmr2020092qkl.605.1652939421074;
Wed, 18 May 2022 22:50:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:e86:b0:461:ca87:44aa with SMTP id
hf6-20020a0562140e8600b00461ca8744aamr2883437qvb.112.1652939420954; Wed, 18
May 2022 22:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 22:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.25.5.69; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.25.5.69
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a41b3fff-6b88-4084-9a02-571553cf003an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 05:50:21 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1468
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 19 May 2022 05:50 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 02:36:38 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>
> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>
> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
> deniers.

Oppositely, it is a standard technique of relativity
supporters.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<1ps77l3.166h1iyv0mo5qN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90497&group=sci.physics.relativity#90497

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 11:26:24 +0200
Organization: De Ster
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <1ps77l3.166h1iyv0mo5qN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
Reply-To: jjlax32@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2d1138470f06863a3d1ea9cb81ae8f5b";
logging-data="7667"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19/6u6ubrFzeIT0i6aLcojxb0q2D8UXIXU="
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.10.5)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D4XHUk/cQt18trhU/v3+NFbKdbs=
 by: J. J. Lodder - Thu, 19 May 2022 09:26 UTC

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:

> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>
> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>
> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
> deniers. Yet relativity is answering the question "what result will I
> get if I measure using my usual tools?" And it does that very well.

It actually is much stronger than that.
You can't falsify spacetime geometry by measuring,
because the geometry tells you what valid ways of measuring are.
(elementary relativity texts pass over this point
by pretending that we know what rigid rods and so on are)

For practicalities: we know that Maxwell's equations
are Lorentz-invariant.
So everything you would want to measure by pottering about
with electromagnetic means must be Lorentz-invariant too.
(provided that you have not made some stupid error)

Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<jemhn0Fa5r5U1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90499&group=sci.physics.relativity#90499

 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: syl...@email.invalid (Sylvia Else)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 19:41:52 +1000
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <jemhn0Fa5r5U1@mid.individual.net>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
<a41b3fff-6b88-4084-9a02-571553cf003an@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net QGxepml/DgNaBVCaUiCLRwnHPbJe8L/dDlKDr3QiVC1ddyIVUm
Cancel-Lock: sha1:WyvFqzIOUj+IeIYGrSvcbF4ZhCk=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <a41b3fff-6b88-4084-9a02-571553cf003an@googlegroups.com>
 by: Sylvia Else - Thu, 19 May 2022 09:41 UTC

On 19-May-22 3:50 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 02:36:38 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>>
>> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>>
>> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
>> deniers.
>
> Oppositely, it is a standard technique of relativity
> supporters.

Do you have some objection to using one's usual measuring tools for
doing measuring?

Sylvia.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<fd0e2f41-3282-4c39-a402-0d8002906855n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90503&group=sci.physics.relativity#90503

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:28c7:b0:6a0:5de3:e6 with SMTP id l7-20020a05620a28c700b006a05de300e6mr3138686qkp.464.1652968862506;
Thu, 19 May 2022 07:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5e11:0:b0:2f9:ef3:38c0 with SMTP id
h17-20020ac85e11000000b002f90ef338c0mr3734782qtx.537.1652968862243; Thu, 19
May 2022 07:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.goja.nl.eu.org!pasdenom.info!nntpfeed.proxad.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, 19 May 2022 07:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jemhn0Fa5r5U1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.25.5.69; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.25.5.69
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net> <a41b3fff-6b88-4084-9a02-571553cf003an@googlegroups.com>
<jemhn0Fa5r5U1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <fd0e2f41-3282-4c39-a402-0d8002906855n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 14:01:02 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 19 May 2022 14:01 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 11:41:56 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 19-May-22 3:50 pm, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 02:36:38 UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote:
> >> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
> >>
> >> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
> >>
> >> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
> >> deniers.
> >
> > Oppositely, it is a standard technique of relativity
> > supporters.
> Do you have some objection to using one's usual measuring tools for
> doing measuring?

No; it's actually your insane gurus that announce them
non-standard and improper.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<ro9f8h10ausrchfctce02qvfgnvr14do70@4ax.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90581&group=sci.physics.relativity#90581

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 09:49:51 -0500
From: ricky...@earthlink.net (Ricardo Jimenez)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:49:46 -0400
Message-ID: <ro9f8h10ausrchfctce02qvfgnvr14do70@4ax.com>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 18
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.190.237.81
X-Trace: sv3-6bhD3jbz6tm5HgYkSiCzWHF1l+aHZgZH23gBk866ZtWD1z3GrmeqgP3DYa4HmuMN3sJdnHkpEuv+EPZ!Kz/Yo/+WNu2YW+n9zdIhgm/gJC+UC0S3BMx8PW0P59d2OmUqcK6gFRGF4cbyMJ5TnRKuONhEROyg!BQy7JNNmKPI8M66psZYREHFOFwHE
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 1832
 by: Ricardo Jimenez - Fri, 20 May 2022 14:49 UTC

On Thu, 19 May 2022 10:36:33 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

>On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>
><snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>
>Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
>deniers. Yet relativity is answering the question "what result will I
>get if I measure using my usual tools?" And it does that very well.
>
>Sylvia.

More precisely it answers the question: Suppose observers A and B in
uniform relative motion with respect to each other use their "usual
tools", viz. rulers and clocks that are at rest with respect to each
of the observers, to determine the differences between distances and
times of two events, how do A's and B's measurements relate?

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<jg38baFnm8cU1@mid.individual.net>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91373&group=sci.physics.relativity#91373

 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: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2022 10:37:58 +0200
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <jg38baFnm8cU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net nfuFRWnXUGpajg/t0ecpzAjyclWrtmVfcLqrUoBW9qbnEppva+
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JMkLEsf75O1b68cCOHwWgm9qVJY=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
 by: Thomas Heger - Sun, 5 Jun 2022 08:37 UTC

Am 16.05.2022 um 03:48 schrieb Tom Capizzi:
> After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists, I finally caught his unfixable mistake.

I had to cut off most of your message, because it is impossible to read
long texts without any formatting or white space.

Ok, it is in fact possible to read a text, despite the author did
everything possible to make it hard.

But you shouldn't count on the willingness to do so.

But let me try to answer your question, anyhow..

Einstein's worst error in 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies' was,
that he attempted to create a function 'tau', which meant a coordinate
transformation between two coordinate systems in relative motion.

Such coordinate transformations should leave the phenomenon described in
system A unchanged, if the desription is converted from A to coordinate
system B.

But Einstein ascribed the function tau to the phenomenon itself, which
was interpreted as deformation of the form of that something (aka
'length contraction').

But coordinate transformations should not do that and change only the
description (iow: change the vectors, not the things, the vectors were
used to describe).

TH

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<664e1019-1ce9-4f7f-a15f-625e24b4f398n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91374&group=sci.physics.relativity#91374

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:210:b0:304:df35:2f17 with SMTP id b16-20020a05622a021000b00304df352f17mr9337337qtx.257.1654420528276;
Sun, 05 Jun 2022 02:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:311:b0:2f3:ddb0:4ae6 with SMTP id
q17-20020a05622a031100b002f3ddb04ae6mr14657438qtw.140.1654420527982; Sun, 05
Jun 2022 02:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2022 02:15:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=46.204.44.236; posting-account=Y2v6DQoAAACGpOrX04JGhSdsTevCdArN
NNTP-Posting-Host: 46.204.44.236
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <664e1019-1ce9-4f7f-a15f-625e24b4f398n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: film...@gmail.com (JanPB)
Injection-Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2022 09:15:28 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 6171
 by: JanPB - Sun, 5 Jun 2022 09:15 UTC

On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 6:48:24 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists,

They are not "cultists".

> I finally caught his unfixable mistake.

There is no "mistake" in relativity, let alone "unfixable". Don't waster your time on
something you have no talent for. Pick a different hobby.

> He hoisted himself with his own petard. Because I use his own words to prove his theory leads to a contradiction.

You'll never do that, it's a waste of time. The only possibility of contradicting relativity is
my experiment. OTOH any internal contradiction in relativity would imply an internal
contradiction within Euclidean geometry. If this is what you claim, just say so.

> I've had some crackpot skeptics try to tell me things like "Einstein didn't mean what he wrote" or "it's been tinkered with so much since he wrote it, it isn't even his anymore". In a peer-reviewed format, I would include the direct quotes and their source.

That makes no difference. His original paper is as good as it was in 1905 and is also
equivalent to the relativity theory as typically presented in textbooks today.

> For this bunch here, you can find all the source material on the internet.. Just search for his books in pdf format. This is what to look for, as I paraphrase it.
> Before Einstein would talk about relativity, he had words about measurement. Each book has a slightly different emphasis, but none refute any of the others, so it is safe to assume they are all attributes. He starts with the definition of a direct measurement. It is simply placing rigid measuring rods end to end to match the ends of the distance being measured. The distance is then found by counting the rods (and fractions thereof). Nothing earthshattering there. But there is nothing relative about it either. The interval, the measuring rods and the observer are all stationary relative to each other. In order to observe any relativistic effects, the distance must be in a relatively moving frame and the observer and his measuring rods are in the relatively stationary frame. And then, the size of the effect depends on the relative velocity. Einstein describes this situation as an indirect measurement. The test for whether or not an indirect measurement is valid is whether or not it gets the same measurement as a direct measurement. (That's why we allowed the non-relative definition). All in all, reasonable propositions. But then he goes into his gedanken experiments. And all of them, as well as every experiment ever performed at fast enough relative velocity, predict that the length measurement will be contracted. A contracted measurement is by definition smaller than the direct measurement. Einstein ignored his own protocol, preferring to believe that the math had to be right, and spacetime had to conform to his expectations.

He didn't "ignore" anything. He simply stated certain assumptions and examined
their consequences.

> You could say it's just my opinion that this is a contradiction.

There is no contradiction there. The theory only described certain relationships
between certain quantities.

> Consider this. All the main points of Newtonian physics are low-speed approximations of their relativistic counterparts. Except the measurement standard, which is indeed a low-speed approximation. Einstein used it because it had worked that way for hundreds of years, because before relativity, all measurements were made in quasistatic frames.

This is the wrong way to use the term "quasistatic".

> Frames whose relative velocity was so small that the relativistic correction factor was unity. As a rule of thumb, if v = c sin(tilt), the quasistatic range of velocity is basically sin(tilt) ≈ tilt. Einstein used a quasistatic protocol to analyze relativistic events. Since a quasistatic protocol is only valid for small velocities, any relativistic predictions based on this protocol are suspect.

Not even wrong.

> The coup de grace is identifying the relativistic version of the protocol.. It turns out that vector spaces come equipped with a protocol for determining how much two arbitrary vectors have in parallel.

This is not even a properly formed sentence.

> This operation is the Euclidean dot product. Geometrically, the dot product is the product of the magnitudes of two arbitrary vectors with the cosine of the angle between them. Normally, we would start with two arbitrary vectors, and use the Law of Cosines to find the angle. Algebraically, we could just dot multiply the elements of the two vectors. But in this application, one of the vectors is a reference unit in the static frame. The other vector is the unknown in the moving frame.

Gobbledygook.

--
Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<60df787e-d27b-4f10-b7b2-03b3692ee97cn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91494&group=sci.physics.relativity#91494

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4e51:0:b0:305:754:9f99 with SMTP id e17-20020ac84e51000000b0030507549f99mr248798qtw.684.1654676035513;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 01:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a695:0:b0:6a6:abd8:5455 with SMTP id
p143-20020a37a695000000b006a6abd85455mr14537864qke.332.1654676035350; Wed, 08
Jun 2022 01:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 01:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <60df787e-d27b-4f10-b7b2-03b3692ee97cn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:13:55 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1590
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:13 UTC

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 4:47:04 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 6:48:24 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com wrote:
> > After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists,
> Sigh. Yet another crackpot.
>
> --
> Jan

Yes. Don't you hate it when crackpot skeptics blather about how it is impossible for there to be anything wrong with special relativity?

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<b8b40f49-41ad-40a6-b3d5-6adf61546f19n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91497&group=sci.physics.relativity#91497

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4433:0:b0:464:4626:7a85 with SMTP id e19-20020ad44433000000b0046446267a85mr24818482qvt.52.1654676852313;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 01:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4249:b0:6a3:303b:6d26 with SMTP id
w9-20020a05620a424900b006a3303b6d26mr22550140qko.0.1654676852161; Wed, 08 Jun
2022 01:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 01:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <486fbc7d-7ae8-45be-8576-800a451af571n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <486fbc7d-7ae8-45be-8576-800a451af571n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b8b40f49-41ad-40a6-b3d5-6adf61546f19n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:27:32 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 9234
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:27 UTC

On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 6:08:20 PM UTC-4, Aldo wrote:
> El domingo, 15 de mayo de 2022 a las 20:48:24 UTC-5, tgca...@gmail.com escribió:
> > After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists, I finally caught his unfixable mistake. He hoisted himself with his own petard. Because I use his own words to prove his theory leads to a contradiction. I've had some crackpot skeptics try to tell me things like "Einstein didn't mean what he wrote" or "it's been tinkered with so much since he wrote it, it isn't even his anymore". In a peer-reviewed format, I would include the direct quotes and their source. For this bunch here, you can find all the source material on the internet. Just search for his books in pdf format. This is what to look for, as I paraphrase it.
> > Before Einstein would talk about relativity, he had words about measurement. Each book has a slightly different emphasis, but none refute any of the others, so it is safe to assume they are all attributes. He starts with the definition of a direct measurement. It is simply placing rigid measuring rods end to end to match the ends of the distance being measured. The distance is then found by counting the rods (and fractions thereof). Nothing earthshattering there. But there is nothing relative about it either. The interval, the measuring rods and the observer are all stationary relative to each other. In order to observe any relativistic effects, the distance must be in a relatively moving frame and the observer and his measuring rods are in the relatively stationary frame. And then, the size of the effect depends on the relative velocity. Einstein describes this situation as an indirect measurement. The test for whether or not an indirect measurement is valid is whether or not it gets the same measurement as a direct measurement. (That's why we allowed the non-relative definition). All in all, reasonable propositions. But then he goes into his gedanken experiments. And all of them, as well as every experiment ever performed at fast enough relative velocity, predict that the length measurement will be contracted. A contracted measurement is by definition smaller than the direct measurement. Einstein ignored his own protocol, preferring to believe that the math had to be right, and spacetime had to conform to his expectations.
> > You could say it's just my opinion that this is a contradiction. Consider this. All the main points of Newtonian physics are low-speed approximations of their relativistic counterparts. Except the measurement standard, which is indeed a low-speed approximation. Einstein used it because it had worked that way for hundreds of years, because before relativity, all measurements were made in quasistatic frames. Frames whose relative velocity was so small that the relativistic correction factor was unity. As a rule of thumb, if v = c sin(tilt), the quasistatic range of velocity is basically sin(tilt) ≈ tilt. Einstein used a quasistatic protocol to analyze relativistic events. Since a quasistatic protocol is only valid for small velocities, any relativistic predictions based on this protocol are suspect.
> > The coup de grace is identifying the relativistic version of the protocol. It turns out that vector spaces come equipped with a protocol for determining how much two arbitrary vectors have in parallel. This operation is the Euclidean dot product. Geometrically, the dot product is the product of the magnitudes of two arbitrary vectors with the cosine of the angle between them. Normally, we would start with two arbitrary vectors, and use the Law of Cosines to find the angle. Algebraically, we could just dot multiply the elements of the two vectors. But in this application, one of the vectors is a reference unit in the static frame. The other vector is the unknown in the moving frame. But the angle between the two vectors is not arbitrary, nor does it depend on any of the vectors. We have already specified this angle by transforming to angular coordinates, v = c sin(tilt). Instead of v being a translation across the page, it is a rotation of the unknown away from its zero phase value. Velocity becomes a phase angle, and the origins of the two frames remain coincident as the velocity vector tilts away from the real axis. The setup is perfect for the dot product.
> > What this tells us, quite unambiguously is that no observer should EVER expect to measure more than the cosine projection of the tilt angle as defined by relative velocity. In other words, REALITY DOES NOT SHRINK. Everything about the Einstein Interpretation is wrong. And since what we measure is actually a geometric illusion, their is no contradiction, either. Each observer is viewing the same unchanging interval, but from a different angle.
> > In other words, if I put a unit of time or distance that I have made a direct measurement of into a frame that departs at constant velocity, what will they project through the dot product? If the velocity is slow enough, the cosine is unity and the projection agrees with the Newtonian protocol. But when relative velocity is high, the cosine can be very small. The projections of these units are the primed variables, ct' = ct cos(tilt) and r' = r cos(tilt). These are equivalent to ct = ct' sec(tilt) and r = r' sec(tilt). Given that v/c = sin(tilt), the Lorentz factor is simply γ = sec(tilt), and the equations become ct = γct' and r = γr'. These are the Einstein equations of time dilation and length contraction, but nothing shrank. They are cosine projections of a rigid rotation into, for lack of a better term, Elsewhere. We used to think that Elsewhere was a place that we could not communicate with, because it would require faster than c signals. Turns out we can't exactly dive in headfirst, but any relativistic velocity rotates reality partially into Elsewhere. The part we can no longer see or measure, but that the co-moving observer swears is still there.
> > And there it is. Special relativity is a poor imitation of the dot product protocol which replaces the Einstein Interpretation. It is built into the hyperbolic trigonometry. Physics cherry-picked the real parts and discarded the rest, forcing the invention of shrinking spacetime. Relativity is just the mathematics of spacetime. No surprise that physics would "discover" a law of mathematics, put a physicist's name on it, and pretend it's now physics.
> TL;DR
> Your rant is useless gibberish.You're nothing more than a poor crank, and instead should go and actually learn physics, or get another hobby.

Your comment is a baseless opinion. I don't need to learn any more physics. I have made a detailed argument. According to the rules of logic (ever hear of it?), if you begin an argument with a premise that is false, it will eventually lead to a contradiction. Not only is the argument invalid, but the premise must be negated. I have challenged the fake theory of relativity. It is not logically valid to use any results of special relativity to rebut this claim. That would be circular logic, never valid. If you want to criticize the argument, you must show that the premise actually leads to some contradiction. That should be an interesting read, since the premise that measurement is based on the Euclidean dot product leads to the same mathematics as did relativity. Good luck finding a contradiction. According to the de facto physics standard, if the numbers work, that's good enough. But with my premise, it is not necessary to abandon objective reality or the formal rules of logic. Occam's razor supports my position. Prove otherwise.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<6390882c-3212-4539-98f2-46452c4202efn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91498&group=sci.physics.relativity#91498

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:400c:b0:6a6:f8e6:92cc with SMTP id h12-20020a05620a400c00b006a6f8e692ccmr2824673qko.561.1654677581033;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 01:39:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:20ec:b0:464:6293:be01 with SMTP id
12-20020a05621420ec00b004646293be01mr30799658qvk.98.1654677570392; Wed, 08
Jun 2022 01:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 01:39:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <6390882c-3212-4539-98f2-46452c4202efn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:39:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2500
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:39 UTC

On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 8:36:38 PM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>
> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>
> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
> deniers. Yet relativity is answering the question "what result will I
> get if I measure using my usual tools?" And it does that very well.
>
> Sylvia.

Einstein defined measurement as being valid if it agreed with the direct measurement of a relatively stationary observer. Then he showed with his gedanken experiments that the best measurements can only be dilated or contracted with relative velocity. That is a pure contradiction. The only reason that his theory appears to do anything very well is that he compensated for his original mistake of using a Newtonian measurement protocol to analyze non-Newtonian velocities. He shoehorned time dilation and length contraction back into the theory after wrongly excluding them with his Newtonian protocol. Of course, he still had to corrupt the rules of logic to avoid the manifestation of a contradiction. Instead of recognizing that it was his own premise that was at fault, he built his house of cards on sand. One good wave, and it all falls apart.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<d90a77db-a37e-4619-94b2-a83d49e87f92n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91499&group=sci.physics.relativity#91499

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:3003:b0:462:1c15:772c with SMTP id ke3-20020a056214300300b004621c15772cmr24270470qvb.71.1654677722800;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 01:42:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:f609:0:b0:6a6:a6f7:3ead with SMTP id
y9-20020a37f609000000b006a6a6f73eadmr16355060qkj.501.1654677722669; Wed, 08
Jun 2022 01:42:02 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 01:42:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jelhoiF4duoU3@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <d90a77db-a37e-4619-94b2-a83d49e87f92n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:42:02 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1646
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:42 UTC

On Wednesday, May 18, 2022 at 8:36:38 PM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 16-May-22 11:48 am, Tom Capizzi wrote:
>
> <snipped due to binary content, apparently>
>
> Trying to redefine measurement is a standard technique for relativity
> deniers. Yet relativity is answering the question "what result will I
> get if I measure using my usual tools?" And it does that very well.
>
> Sylvia.

I question the validity of any comment that assumes a pure text message is "binary content".

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<174bc459-0fc9-4de5-9bd2-de7f528dae07n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91500&group=sci.physics.relativity#91500

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1a1b:b0:6a7:aa:d474 with SMTP id bk27-20020a05620a1a1b00b006a700aad474mr1569456qkb.680.1654678403858;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 01:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:e74e:0:b0:46b:55e7:3152 with SMTP id
g14-20020a0ce74e000000b0046b55e73152mr14146645qvn.41.1654678403745; Wed, 08
Jun 2022 01:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!usenet-fr.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: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 01:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <jg38baFnm8cU1@mid.individual.net>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=209.6.153.192; posting-account=anpm0goAAAD7eq4-R7Tlsnov4nyr6Xqb
NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.6.153.192
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com> <jg38baFnm8cU1@mid.individual.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <174bc459-0fc9-4de5-9bd2-de7f528dae07n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: tgcapi...@gmail.com (Tom Capizzi)
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 08:53:23 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Tom Capizzi - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 08:53 UTC

On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 4:38:06 AM UTC-4, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 16.05.2022 um 03:48 schrieb Tom Capizzi:
> > After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of cultists, I finally caught his unfixable mistake.
> I had to cut off most of your message, because it is impossible to read
> long texts without any formatting or white space.
>
> Ok, it is in fact possible to read a text, despite the author did
> everything possible to make it hard.
>
> But you shouldn't count on the willingness to do so.
>
>
> But let me try to answer your question, anyhow..
>
>
> Einstein's worst error in 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies' was,
> that he attempted to create a function 'tau', which meant a coordinate
> transformation between two coordinate systems in relative motion.
>
> Such coordinate transformations should leave the phenomenon described in
> system A unchanged, if the desription is converted from A to coordinate
> system B.
>
> But Einstein ascribed the function tau to the phenomenon itself, which
> was interpreted as deformation of the form of that something (aka
> 'length contraction').
>
> But coordinate transformations should not do that and change only the
> description (iow: change the vectors, not the things, the vectors were
> used to describe).
>
>
> TH

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the idea of coordinate transformation. What Einstein got totally wrong was the definition of a valid measurement. He applied a standard that had been in use for centuries. Unfortunately for him, he was trying to describe the new physics of relativistic velocity. He took the valid mathematical procedure for determining parallelness and incorrectly assigned the low speed approximation of this mathematical standard to be his measurement protocol. A number of contradictions result, which can only be corrected by the addition of more ad hoc corrections. Reminds me of the failed attempts to correct the geocentric model of the Solar System by the addition of ever more epicycles. The geocentric model was ultimately abandoned because it was wrong. Special relativity deserves the same fate.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<_bmdnXI-c7KTIT3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91508&group=sci.physics.relativity#91508

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 10:11:10 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 10:11:09 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com>
<60df787e-d27b-4f10-b7b2-03b3692ee97cn@googlegroups.com>
From: tjrobert...@sbcglobal.net (Tom Roberts)
In-Reply-To: <60df787e-d27b-4f10-b7b2-03b3692ee97cn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <_bmdnXI-c7KTIT3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 38
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-2bjHErlZK/9p7NRr7J2Zm9DmrWyDEIUAq6fzsFaNr3qsqdczsnfmO8ya0UZ78xRzZULGkM2JR0cafUC!CPQWgExrk3pIAzYsIXsLAjUOd9UmIqFwq7TDIkledK8eoNPLpOaPnuYx3voKm1QuDnjpMkVgiA==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2775
 by: Tom Roberts - Wed, 8 Jun 2022 15:11 UTC

On 6/8/22 3:13 AM, Tom Capizzi wrote:
> On Monday, May 16, 2022 at 4:47:04 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
>> On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 6:48:24 PM UTC-7, tgca...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>> After years of rereading Einstein and arguing with his legions of
>>> cultists,
>> Sigh. Yet another crackpot.
>>
>> -- Jan
>
> Yes. Don't you hate it when crackpot skeptics blather about how it is
> impossible for there to be anything wrong with special relativity?

Don't you hate it when people don't realize that the mathematics
underlying Special Relativity has been proven to be as self-consistent
as is Euclidean geometry, and as is real analysis?

This essentially means that cranks and crackpots will not find
inconsistencies in SR -- what it would take to do that is one of:
A) finding an error in those proofs
or
B) finding internal inconsistencies in both Euclidean geometry
and real analysis

Nobody around here has any hope of doing any of that. Including you.

> Einstein defined measurement [... claims of inconsistencies in SR]

Such empty claims are useless. Show us what you think is a contradiction
or internal inconsistency.

> [...] A number of contradictions result, which can only be corrected
> by the addition of more ad hoc corrections.

There are no known inconsistencies in SR. There are no "ad hoc
corrections" in SR. Your empty claims are useless -- SHOW US.

Tom Roberts

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error

<2989184a-ae20-4f99-9502-9cfee885ebf9n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=91545&group=sci.physics.relativity#91545

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5296:b0:464:4d6d:afe2 with SMTP id kj22-20020a056214529600b004644d6dafe2mr41992761qvb.70.1654748838010;
Wed, 08 Jun 2022 21:27:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:271f:b0:6a7:1c42:5158 with SMTP id
b31-20020a05620a271f00b006a71c425158mr2736721qkp.671.1654748837887; Wed, 08
Jun 2022 21:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 21:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <_bmdnXI-c7KTIT3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.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: <b067e4e7-bb62-4130-950c-5663f4983806n@googlegroups.com>
<5086313b-2d82-4e27-9aae-e1dd2cf7a954n@googlegroups.com> <60df787e-d27b-4f10-b7b2-03b3692ee97cn@googlegroups.com>
<_bmdnXI-c7KTIT3_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2989184a-ae20-4f99-9502-9cfee885ebf9n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2022 04:27:18 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1922
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 9 Jun 2022 04:27 UTC

On Wednesday, 8 June 2022 at 17:11:18 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote:

> Don't you hate it when people don't realize that the mathematics
> underlying Special Relativity has been proven to be as self-consistent
> as is Euclidean geometry, and as is real analysis?

Your Shit is a bit more than just underlying mathematics.
And it's really funny how you're invoking the authority of
Euclid, rejected by your bunch of idiots because
of some assertion of your insane guru.

> There are no known inconsistencies in SR.

No known by you inconsistencies. It's trivial to
show one, but a fanatic idiot is blind anyuway.

Pages:12345
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor