Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  nodelist  faq  login

JOHN PAUL ELECTED POPE!! (George and Ringo miffed.)


tech / sci.physics.relativity / latest

Re: Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 50 Minutes ago by: rotchm

Maybe you are not smart enough to notice but your post is off topic; you are posting in the wrong NG. Learn some respect. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: [SR] Many language errors. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Hours 16 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Maybe assimilated and acceptable, but bullshit anyway. We have GPS now and we can test it directly.

Re: [SR] Many language errors. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Hours 43 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

Well, I do care. I find that the clearer and more precise it is, the better it is assimilated and acceptable. Exemple : "It is the clock at rest that always indicates the shortest duration". It is both badly said, and at the same time

Re: Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Hours 11 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

I meant toward West, not East.

Re: Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Hours 12 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

The problem, as I see, is that such movement is legal under international laws. The same laws that Putin used to invade Ukraine, to support separatists. And this is a major problem, because war could spread like wildfire toward East, und

Re: Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Hours 18 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Meanwhile a number of Russian TG channels is lying impudently, like always.

Re: Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Hours 22 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

THE LEGAL ASPECT OF UNDECLARED WAR: Meanwhile, a number of Russian TG channels suggest that in this way Zelensky is preparing for the future seizure of Western Ukraine by Poland, introducing a special legal status for Polish military per

Warning: Zelensky opened the door to NATO, coming from Poland. WWIII.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

This is the most stupid thing that the fucking clown made since ever. This allows NATO to enter into the battlefield as "peacemakers". Russia warned that this is the most threatening move to its national security. https://twitter.com/Kyiv

Re: Imbecile Richard Hertz repeats himself (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Hours 9 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

I'm curious about one thing that came into my mind, regarding electrons and QFT definition of a particle. If QFT defines a particle as the tiniest ripple in the quantum field (don't forget that QFT evolved from Wave Mechanics, not Matrix M

Re: [SR] Many language errors. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Hours 28 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Especially about their own.

Re: [SR] Many language errors. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Hours 31 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

I think you don't really understand what a human being is. Scientists will never accept that we can take them back to their land. They are human beings like many who read here. If you ask a scientist to come and rub shoulders with me,

Re: [SR] Many language errors. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Hours 44 Minutes ago by: J. J. Lodder

I know that you cannot believe this, but real scientists don't care about errors of language. All they care about is content. And guess what: they don't have your 'misunderstandings', Jan

Re: Real times (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Hours 48 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No. Sometimes it's out of order. A clock is not any fucken avatar of any fucken Great Mystical Essence. It is our tool. It indicates what we want it to indicate. And that is - time. May be TAI, or UTC, or GPS, or zone...

Re: Real times (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Hours 55 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

A clock always indicates real time. Real time Tr. Or proper time. A few pies in the mouth would do good to idiots incapable of understanding this thing, and who, incapable and ashamed, come and shit on me with hatred and jealousy. B

[SR] Relativistic ideas...

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 8 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

There is a notion that remains true in the theory of relativity, it is that of proper time and observable time. I don't like the term "improper time", I prefer the more beautiful and truer term "observable" time. Not to be confused eith

Re: Real times (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 10 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Yes. Time is really what clocks indicate: TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times - all of them. It's just that the clocks are obeying some abstract, human designed concept from outside of their tale.

Re: Imbecile Richard Hertz repeats himself (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 21 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

Merci de ne pas insulter les correspondants, s'il vous plait. R.H.

Re: Real times (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 21 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

There are things in the theory of relativity which are true, but which are extremely poorly said. It comes down to basic definitions. Physicists talk about the relativity of time, but they themselves, in extreme arrogance, say they un

Re: Imbecile Richard Hertz repeats himself (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 36 Minutes ago by: Dono.

Appropriate signature

[SR] Many language errors.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Hours 36 Minutes ago by: Richard Hachel

Il existe dans la théorie de la relativité, de nombreuses incompréhensions, et de nombreuses erreurs de langage. Les choses étant très mal définies. Il y a deux erreurs que peut faire un guitariste : ne pas tendre assez sa corde,

Real times

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Hours 46 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

TAI time, UTC, GPS, zone times - that's how a time from the real world looks lik,e. Not especially similiar to your gedanken idiocy...

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the elementary charge? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Hours 6 Minutes ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

No, they are _assumed_ to be point-_like_ because no inner structure of them has been discovered yet. Not least that has to do with the fact that electrons, as they are quantum objects, must be described by a complex-valued wavefuncti

Re: Why do you see a laser from sideways? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Hours 33 Minutes ago by: J. J. Lodder

No light ever does. Ask Mr. Huygens about it, Jan

Re: New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Hours 37 Minutes ago by: Thomas Heger

We know actually that some 'star-wars-weapons' functioned properly (at least in the US). For instance the WTC-complex looked after 9/11, as if someone shot down a beam, which dematerialised about a million tons of steel and concrete.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Hours 51 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Just like any other mumbling idiot.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Hours 32 Minutes ago by: Thomas Heger

I always try to correct my mistakes, but had no incentive to correct Einstein's mistakes. My aim was actually, to find out, how Einstein made his mistakes. So I followed each line of thought and tried to identify, when things started

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Hours 43 Minutes ago by: Thomas Heger

No The Jupiter has Moons and these will be planets in the far future, while Jupiter will be a star. So: the planets have grown out of their central star and gain mass over time. The stars themselves grow, too. Later stars or planet

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Hours 21 Minutes ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Naturally we do; we don't use Einstein's non-euclidean idiocies.

Re: Imbecile Richard Hertz repeats himself (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Hours 51 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

And still you don't have a fucking clue about it. Your relativity fried your single couple of functional neurons long time ago, imbecile. Explain why NIST only preserve the "classic radius" of the electron (asserting it's 10E-15 mt, whic

Re: Why do you see a laser from sideways? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Hours 40 Minutes ago by: Python

You don't. Yep, it's gay.

Re: New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Hours 53 Minutes ago by: whodat

The reason things like the SAM-D antimissile missile system worked to help to dismantle the Soviet Union was because the Soviets were so bloody paranoid that they lost sight of the actual possibilities. What you're reporting here is si

Re: Why do you see a laser from sideways? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Hours 35 Minutes ago by: Paul Alsing

Some of its light reflects off particles in the atmosphere, Mitch... here, you could have looked this up for yourself if you weren't so ignorant and/or lazy... https://www.wtamu.edu/~cbaird/sq/2013/02/14/how-bright-is-a-laser-beam-when-

Imbecile Richard Hertz repeats himself (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Hours 10 Minutes ago by: Dono.

Yep

Why do you see a laser from sideways?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Hours 12 Minutes ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

some of its light is not going straight....

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Hours 49 Minutes ago by: Richard Hertz

According to quantum field theory, particles are the tiniest ripples in the quantum field. Of course, QFT (and QED, QCD) fail to explain how come they gain mass (and charge), and why 200 of them are so short lived. The above crap, devel

Re: The Cause of the Big Bang (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 23 Hours 19 Minutes ago by: Clutterfreak

It would acquire the diseases of billionaires.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day ago by: Al Coe

Those flashes occur at the source after t'(turn-around) and before t"(turn-around), and they occur after t=5 and before t=35, and likewise they can be described in terms of infinitely many other systems of coordinates. Naturally we use c

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: Python

Maciej Wozniak schwrote:

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occur, if he says 5 flashes occurred while he traveled from A to B, and 5 flashes occurred when he traveled from B to A. When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occurred? David

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: Al Coe

They occur (at the source) after the first five and before the last five. In terms of S1 (x',t'), 5 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 35 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. In terms

Re: New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

Right now, ultrashort laser pulses (concentrating high energy levels) are used as COLD TOOLS to disrupt valence bonding in matter, breaking it away. And it doesn't involve HEAT. Just molecular bonding rupture, the matter is being cut and

Re: New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

What if it's based on a two stages procedure: First, ionize a direct path toward targets. Secondly, use it as a tunnel to convey longitudinal energy, which is focused by the ionized path? Some kind of virtual longitudinal rail, which co

Re: New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

Remember Tesla's offer to UK in the '30s? The idea was ahead of its time, but basically was based on disruptive electric discharges through the atmosphere, only that it wasn't possible to model the pathway of such beams (like directed lig

Re: The Cause of the Big Bang (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

What would cause an infinite strength gravity singularity to explode?

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

If the flash rate is one pulse per 2 seconds on the return trip which takes the traveler 10 seconds to go from B to A, and the flash rate is one pulse per 2 seconds when the traveler goes from A to B in 10 seconds during the first leg of

Re: GTR (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 1 Hour ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

The past has already happened and it leaves left overs like fossils. The future is yet to happen but always will.

New physics principles allowed the creation of multiwavelength direct

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Russia has announced that is in possession of a new type of beam weapons that are based on new physics principles, which render obsolete kinetic weapons. Operational beam weapons are capable of render useless OR destroy any target, up to

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Well, Pyt, you're a true idiot, but I bet you're still able to imagine where I have your preferences. Your insane religion, poor stinker, demands clocks to be not only desynchronized, but also running with different speeds. That's what

Re: What Time is it, Everywhere? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

They got there...'In the beginning, ...'

The Cause of the Big Bang

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Imagine if you will.. if trees had leaves that didn't fall to the ground. they would stay on the branches and more leaves would grow every Spring and they didn't fall to the ground. Would that tree explode...eventually?

Re: What Time is it, Everywhere? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

The universe has the BB age. Far out objects had to get there in time. We are not looking backward to the BB. We are seeing objects that took a lot of time to get to their distance. Mitchell Raemsch

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Then the odd has to find a newsserver he feels is secure... in other words one that you guys cannot hack.. and dat ain't easy to find. Those newsservers out there can be hacked with Brutus or any http password hacking program. Pwned w

Re: GTR (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

What about the future? There is no future. Otherwise you would have pictures of the future in your shoebox. "Oh, how cute, is that you when you were a baby?" "Who is this old guy in this picture?"

Re: GTR (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

what does gravity do to the past? nothing i guess..there is no gravity..there is no past. If there was a past.. all your photos in your shoebox filled with photos would be empty.. it would be in the past also. But, there is no past. So,

Re: What Time is it, Everywhere? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

If I knew what time it is everywhere I can synchronize my watch to it and have the correct time...everywhere. everyday everytime

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 4 Hours ago by: Python

I don't like serious clocks, they are boring. I prefer fancy clock you can dance on the beach with.... Anyway, according to one of the greatest logician Humanity ever had, how t' =/= t would have as consequences practically? If you claim

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 4 Hours ago by: Python

Thomas Heger wrote:

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And in terms of GPS, clocks are indicating t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 4 Hours ago by: Al Coe

Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous wi

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Simultaneous for who? ? ? R.H.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

If you can't even tell me what you expect - I can't do what you expect, poor halfbrain.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 7 Hours ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the turn-around event at B. How far did the flash from the first emission event travel and what is the flash rate of the emission events in S2? Thanks, David Seppala

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 8 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

If you cannot even tell us what 'a day' is, according to you, you cannot expect us to tell you anything about it, Jan

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 10 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

How could I when you've not told what "telling" is according to you, poor halfbrain?

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

You are still not telling us what 'a day' is, according to you, Jan

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 12 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I think that an in-depth reflection on this subject would be worthwhile and welcome. Too many things do not fit in the theory of relativity as it is presented. R.H.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 12 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

No Relativity is actually a trivial idea and dates back at least to Galileo. Therefore: The idea, that Einstein had invented relativity is not even funny. Special relativity in connection to electrodynamics of moving bodies dates bac

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 13 Hours ago by: George Hammond

Dear Sir: In the FLRW metric the scale factor "a(t) is a positive number greater than 1 which increases with time. And the FLRW metric is known to "expand" with time – and since my metric is similar – what makes you think that it' i

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

??? In math we have a lot of different objects, that we can use to do something useful. But any object belongs to a certain class of objects and you cannot equate objects from different classes. One minimal requirement for an equat

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

I think, that the partical concept (known as 'standard modell') is wrong. IOW: particles are not real, but denote certain states. As proof of concept I wanted to use 'Growing Earth', because if the Earth would grow from within, the ide

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Relativistic time scale is not for the solar system. It is different for every fucking muon in the solar system. And you're a very, very, very impudent liar, as expected from a relativistic stinker.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 19 Hours ago by: Volney

If one adds the first two equations, you get: tau3 - tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2] + sqrt[(t3-t2)^2 - (x3-x2)^2] But the third equation reads: tau3 - tau1 = sqrt[(t3-t1)^2 - (x3-x1)^2] In other words, except for a particular spec

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 22 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is not a bad habit, it's a very good, clean habit. It's a bit like a simpler version of the tensor index notation: letter choices reflect the meaning. But it does require that the reader learns how to write and read this sort of th

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 23 Hours ago by: JanPB

No, I used paper and pen :-) using Cartan's calculus which is much faster than Christoffel symbols. The best pen to use is a Pilot pen which for some reason is not sold in the US, you need to buy it in Asian imports stores or on eBay (or

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's 'On the elec trodynamics of moving bodies ' (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 23 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

The fully relativistic time scale for the solar system that is used for calculating motions of planets, probes and so on is TCB. (temps coordinée barycentrique) or Barycentric Coordinate Time. [1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barycent

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

More specifically, we know that: Let To²=Tr²+Et² Let To²=Tr²+(x/c)² If x = (1/2)aTr²+Vri.Tr So To²=Tr²+[(1/2)aTr²+Vri.Tr]²/c² And To=Tr.sqrt([1/4Vr²+Vri²+Vr.Vri]/c²) Nota bene : if Vri=0 (initial speed=0) ---> To=Tr.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 1 Day 23 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Too bad for your moronic laws of physics. Well, of course you imagine we have to abandon the clocks we're using when they don't fit your precious little formulas... a mistake of yours. Take your "clocks using standard second" and put t

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days ago by: Richard Hertz

Thanks for your reply. Regarding measures of time duration lower than 1 second, even at femtoseconds range, I perfectly can imagine a layered structure of time: Global (at the Solar System): for coordinated time above 1 second mark, up

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days ago by: Tom Roberts

But if you used that as a "clock", none of the laws of physics in textbooks would be correct -- because those laws all use local time (i.e. based on nearby clocks using standard seconds). But your computer display IS NOT A CLOCK, it i

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days ago by: George Hammond

[George] Yes – this is not a "gravitational" problem, it actually comes from an unrelated academic field of research, where yes, the space is actually contracting.

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 1 Hour ago by: George Hammond

Hi JanPB - Mathematica apparently uses (0,1,2,3) while Maxima uses (1,2,3,4) , so I am guessing that you're using Mathematica while I'm using Maxima. I have rerun the problem on Maxima using "a^2" instead of "a". And I got exactly the s

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 1 Hour ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Still, THE SAME day takes different amount of ISO seconds, depending on the position and the speed of the clock. And that means that your precious laws of physics written in days, or in day related seconds - will be different. And that

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 1 Hour ago by: whodat

I get your point but you didn't answer my question. It doesn't matter what all the books say, as far as I know none of them has a test for determining whether the entire universe is rotating. It probably is, but a test to assure us

Re: GTR (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

Unless someone has a ...gravity watch i don't know abou?... does a coo-coo clock run on gravity????

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

There cannot be any constant multiplier between any fixed clock second and the observed length of the day. (as defined by the observed rotation of the Earth) The observed length of the (siderial) day is highly variable. (with today's pre

Re: GTR (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Please stop looking for the bow, too much logic for yous. Bow and arrow? dats called logic. Does any of your clocks need Gravity to run???? Of course not. There is no Gravity. It's just a theory. come on, really...an arrow witho

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Every single book on astronomy, astrophysics or cosmology that I've read present evidence of universal rotation as a NATURAL BEHAVIOR, as observed everywhere and for millennials. I have this book open in one tab at my computer for more t

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

They're valid wherever human observers are involved, sorry.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Does an idiot physicist only consider easy things? Smartly. And I need to be sure of that, because....?

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I was careful enough to comment about accuracy down to 1 SECOND, not lower. The complex mathematical description of the motion of the Moon around Earth is, as of today, incredibly accurate. I don't see any problem incorporating such bod

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

What are you comparing the universe to. What is your test to make this determination? Gotta blame gravity on something, but a statement without any demonstrable basis leaves us nowhere. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to be able to agr

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 2 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

It's easy to SAY that, but it's not so easy to DO that. Ask yourself: how could I (you) construct a clock on the moon that displays UTC? Be sure your clock will still display properly when all radio links to earth are down, and your cloc

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distr (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I've always thought this concept of relativistic mass a bit strange, and very unnecessary. m = 0.511 MeV/c² p = m.Vr = m.[Vo/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)] E= mc².sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) = mc²/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) I have always thought that a bus did

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Putting aside the stupidity of trying to mess with pico and femtoseconds to dictate TIME, and going back to SECONDS, I don't see any problem in the normalization of ABSOLUTE SOLAR SYSTEM TIME, giving the proper conversion formulae that

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 3 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

And NONE of them are valid on the moon, not to mention Jupiter or the Andromeda galaxy. So the claim "absolute" is just plain wrong. Tom Roberts

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I repost here an excerpt of my post on Sep 5, 2021. https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/wzXD6jt2aGc/m/nwlIFW-uBwAJ What is the nature of the electric charge "e" of an electron and why it's energy isn't considered in E=mc2

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

To satisfy the needs of the imbecile relativists, you have to add the 3D coordinates of the location of the atomic clock, referred to the point-like center of the Solar System, up to picometers accuracy. Then, you have to provide the tran

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Not just one. There is TAI, GPS, UTC, zone times... though the differences ale slight, they are different.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 5 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

Absolute time exists. The GPS uses absolute time to synch the GPS clock with the ground clock. This is achieved by adding 4.1617 transitions of Cs 133 radiation to the GPS second as follows: A ground clock second is defined by 9,192,631,7

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

For instance, in a model of relativistic idiots we have a dilating time while in the model applied by sane people for GPS measurements it is absolute; and that's because understanding by an idiot may be different than the understanding

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

According to current modern and classic physics, you CAN'T HAVE a point-like charged particle (radius zero). Only this disrupts the mathematics of the models for energy fields, and led to RE-NORMALITION in quantum physics, to "eliminate"

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

You forgot one thing that exist from the lowest amount of volume (inside atoms) to the higher amount of volume (universe), and has a simple name: ROTATION Everything ROTATES in the entire 3D space, from within atoms to galaxy clusters.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 6 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

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

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 6 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

Of course not! Time is part of the MODEL, not the world. Models, of course, are how we humans understand and learn about the world we inhabit. Tom Roberts

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And while "running" - forbidden by it GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 7 Hours ago by: Python

117 years, still running. You'll rot in the holy soil of Poland for eons and Relativity will still be there, Woz. This is why your silly posts enjoy people, you know?

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Impudent denying the reality may only help your Shit in the short run, Pyt...

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 7 Hours ago by: Python

Still wrong, even if you repeated it one thousand time, Woz...

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 7 Hours ago by: Reinhardt Behm

What proton does an electron in the beam of a CRT belong to? What electron do the protons circulation in the LHC belong to? This alone shows that your idea of them belonging together is pure bullshit. Electrons as well as protons and

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 10 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

Yes, as far as we know today. But they are excitations in a quantum field, so they don't behave as traditional particles -- they don't possess a definite position, momentum, or energy, they have intrinsic spin, etc.... Protons are A LO

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 10 Hours ago by: Russell Eaton

Time does not exist. The word "time" is a human shorthand for saying "the measurement of movement from A to B". There is no absolute "time" phenomenon that is out there somewhere waiting to be understood. . For example, we humans have deci

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 10 Hours ago by: Russell Eaton

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 10 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

When a fanatic idiot is asserting it simply must be true. Well, no. There is no constant multiplier between a day and an ISO second anymore. Your bunch of idiots has ruined this rule, just like many other reasonable rules.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 11 Hours ago by: Python

still wrong Wozzie.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 11 Hours ago by: Python

wrong.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 11 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Well, a mistake of mine, of course. It's 86400.000038 on a GPS satellite. Still different than 86400.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Well, it's actually you not understranding it, Lod. Brainwashed fanatic idiots never understand much.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Modified and transported t'=t is still a special case of t'=t. Sorry. Did I say "unmodified t'=t"? For sure I didn't. What you say is not denying what I say. What a pity that people making real measurements in the real world have differ

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Yes, poor idiot, yes. 86400 ISO seconds on Earth, 86400.000044u on a GPS satellite. Two different numbers. Surprise!

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the elementary charge? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Electrons may have a tiny electric dipole moment. (as predicted by the standard model, from higher order processes) Other theories predict a larger dipole moment. So far only experimental limits are known. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Woz' problem lies even deeper. He also doesn't understand clocks on Earth, so he doesn't understand what TAI and GPS time are, Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Now you need to say, what you like to do with the quoted statement from me. There are two possibilities: you like to say, that that statement is correct you like to say, that that statement is incorrect Most likely you meant the second

Re: What Time is it, Everywhere? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Time is right here in space. It is not in some other 4th dimension... it's right here in space. You don't use a clock to measure the 4th dimension. Everywhere means here. What Time is it, Everywhere?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

x' is not a variable! x' denotes the location of the mirror at rest in k, but measured in K-coordinates. That position is in some distance d from the emitter of the zero spot of k. This distance was not named 'd', nor even mentioned, b

What Time is it, Everywhere?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Okay, it's the same everywhere. You should be able to synchronize your clock to the time it is everywhere. What Time is it, Everywhere?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Well, no. Bad habbits are still bad, even if they are common practice. Here we have two different mathematical objects, which cannot be equated. At least a discussion would be necessary, why the author thought, that a time measure and

GTR

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

What does GTR stand for? It stands for General Theory of Relativity. There is one major problem with Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity... it's all about Gravity, and the problem is, if you look out there there is no Gravity

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

'Electron' and 'proton' belong to a single structure. These names denote the exterior and interior extrem-point of a standing rotational wave. Points have no surface. This is like a Jo-Jo or a giroscope. The same structure can hav

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the elementary charge? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 14 Hours ago by: Mikko

Electrons are point particles, i.e., they are so small that their size and shape cannot be measured. They are magnetic, whith a south pole and a north pole, so their behaviour is not speherically symmetric but it is, as far as has been o

Re: Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 14 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

Electrons appear to be point charges. Protons are known not to be elementary (they're make of quarks). Sylvia.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

That's sexist. What if they ask it to a she-male? Gender choice matters.

Are protons and electrons solid blobs? How is distributed the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Are they solid irregular blobs with mass or are they empty? (not spherical shape). How is the elementary charge distributed on their surface (or volume)? Because, if they are solid, then another unknown force hold its "substance" together

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 15 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 15 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

It's contracting.

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 15 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

No, no: _inverse_ square.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 19 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You contradict yourself (again). Remember, the two propositions are: (1) The elapsed proper time along a uniform path (no acceleration) between two given events ei and ej is sqrt[(ti-tj)^2) - (xi-xj)^2)]. (2) The elapsed proper time al

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Jean-Pierre, you are tired. Go to sleep, and tomorrow, you might see things a little more clearly. R.H.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 20 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

[I generally ignore Wozniak's nonsense, but occasionally will respond.] On 5/19/22 12:24 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote: This is WRONG. What actually happens is: MODIFIED AND TRANSPORTED t' = t That is, unlike what your equation is attempti

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 20 Hours ago by: Python

I don't care to spot where you did a mistake, none of your intermediate equations makes sense to me. The result is just plain ABSURD. *sigh* It's basic stuff...

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

The correct équation is To=Tr.sqrt(1+(1/4)Vr²/c²) in the case of accelerated frame, and To=Tr.sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) in the case of constant speed. In To=Tr.sqrt(1+(1/4)Vr²/c²) : Vr depends on acceleration. Vr is Vr=a.Tr ----

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Python

sqrt(1+(1/4)Vr²/c²) does not depend on acceleration, so its limit when a->0 cannot be the value for no acceleration at all i.e. equal to Tr.sqrt(1+Vr²/c²). you are even more ridiculous than ever, Richard.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Because the answer is known to everyone. If an entity is moving at constant speed Vo, its proper time will be Tr=To.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) Or Tr=To/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) The best-known example is that of Langevin's traveler, where a traveler goe

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Of course. x = 1/2aTr² + Vi.Tr If no acceleration, a=0 and x=Vi.Tr You are right. And? R.H.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You didn't run away from the venue, but you ran away from the debunking of your beliefs, as all crackpots do. When your lies are exposed, you just flee and start over again in a new thread. I ask again: What is the elapsed proper time

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Al Coe

Letting S1 and S2 denote the inertial coordinate systems in which the traveling twin is at rest on his outbound and return legs, respectively, the turn-around event at B is simultaneous with the 10th emission event in terms of S1, and it

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 21 Hours ago by: Python

So no answer about a dimensioned equation to stay true even in different unit systems? "One of the best logician Humanity ever had" is giving up? No. Well, again you missed the point. Study SR, GR, physics, etc. *think*, don't rant w

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 22 Hours ago by: Python

You never read, Richard, do you? You are pathologically unable to even consider an argument that oppose your prejudice. You should ask for medical help. The limit for low accelerations MUST be the value for 0 acceleration. It is not the

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Don't attack him. For once he responds correctly to a post without insulting him, he should not be discouraged. R.H.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 22 Hours ago by: rotchm

<Snipped off topic rants> Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Nothing can ever be explained to a fanatic idiot refusing to listen to the wiser ones, sorry. Have you ever heard of so -called time dilation, BTW? Suppose a clock in a valley would count a different amount of ISO seconds than a clock o

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

S'il n'y a pas d'accélération, on retombe sur la formule usuelle: To=Tr/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²). Car comme To=Tr.sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) si Vo=Vr/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) alors To=Tr/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²). To²=Tr²+(x/c)² To²=Tr²+(Vr.Tr/c)² To=Tr.sqrt

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

This, like many of your other scenarios, is the problem of trying to apply time dilation formulas when you switch inertial reference frames, which is what you do every single time the traveler turns a corner of the polygon. The line of si

Re: [SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Python

As usual, as no term is defined ("real"/"not real" velocity??), it's not worth reading it. It is not math, it's garbage. Anyway, the formula cannot be right. As it is independent from the actual acceleration is should be true also for an

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Who sent you here? You've been reading too many textbooks.

[SR] Where does this strange (1/4) come from?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

A user asks me where this strange 1/4 comes from that appears in my equation To=Tr.sqrt(1+(1/4)Vr²/c²) Let To²=Tr²+Et² Let To²=Tr²+(x/c)² Let us pose, since we are working here in real velocities and since it is a uniformly ac

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Python

As was numerous posts of mine, and others, you ignored. It's one out of two questions. The second one is: how cannot you see, with my hint, that it cannot be right?

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Oh! A post without insults. It's good. So there needs to be a reward. And answer the question asked. The question is: but where does this strange 1/4 come from? R.H.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 2 Days 23 Hours ago by: Python

Could you explain us how can a^2+b^2=c^2 for a rectangular triangle be true or not depending on the choice of units, Maciej? Thanks.

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days ago by: Python

Well, so you changed you mind. It's not any more the same clock values for both travellers (it was contradictory, as pointed out by several people btw). But where is the 1/4 coming from? You didn't show how you derived this equation. An

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

As you said yourself, poor stinker: together with your idiot guru you should use another word. Two events are simultaneous when their TAI/UTC/GPS time coordinates are equal. That's how things are in the real world. Doesn't matter how

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days ago by: rotchm

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 10:41:33 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote: Its a definition. Don't you know what a definition is? Whats its purpose, its use? No answer? I've now told/explained it to you. Now you should know. You are confus

Re: [SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days ago by: rotchm

<Diversions snipped> Before you start a new thread, finish the old ones; You have unfinished threads: On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 10:41:33 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote: Its a definition. Don't you know what a definition is? Whats its

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Note to the fucking polish parrot, Jan Piotr: 1) Bodkin already gave up, after years trying to understand 1905 relativity and failing miserably. It's also time that you retire, before your brain melt due to the struggle of your COGNI

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

You have to read the answers you get. Some may be interesting. R.H.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 2 Hours ago by: Paul B. Andersen

DQoNCkRlbiAxOS4wNS4yMDIyIDE1OjU0LCBza3JldiBzZXBwNjIzQHlhaG9vLmNvbToNCj4g SW4gcmVzcG9uc2UgdG8gYSBwcmV2aW91cyBwb3N0LCBDb2Ugc3VnZ2VzdGVkIGl0IHdhcyBs aWtlIHRoZSB0d2luJ3MgcGFyYWRveC4gU28gSSBhZGRlZCBhbiBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIHBhcmFt ZXRlciB0byB0aGUgdHdpb

[SR] Was Richard Hachel's equation correct?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

This equation, which I had posed for its beauty and its simplicity, a long time ago already, then which I extended to uniformly accelerated movements, provided that the departure of the protagonists takes place at rest, was it correct? I

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 3 Hours ago by: Paul B. Andersen

Good grief! :-D

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Rather, relativistic idiot Python is not able to unserstand it couldn't. No surprise from a relativistic idiot. How come? Are relativistic idiots really THAT bad? Sure.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: Python

Maciej Wozniak schwrote:

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: rotchm

This does not address the OP in any way. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: rotchm

Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

5 points for every word written with capital letters, BTW.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 4 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

[I ignore the off-by-one ambiguity of whether the light starts with a flash or a gap between flashes.] Your approach is incorrect. You are attempting to apply "time dilation" and "length contraction" to a physical situation in which t

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

Oh dear... This is covered in ANY Relativity book or course, even in sci.physics FAQ for DECADES... You will try, in vain, to find flaws in SR until you'll die, instead of simply LEARNING it, David, right? Why that? We KNOW (it is PROVEN

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Whan a fanatic idiot is asserting - it simply must be true. Your bunch of idiotts doesn't have any physical results, then.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 6 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

A forteriori, units are never relevant for any law of physics. If a result depends on the choice of one particular set of units it is not a physical result. Conversely, any physical result can be obtained with any (consistent) system of

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

When a fanatic idiot is asserting - it simply must be true.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Twin's paradox contradiction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 7 Hours ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario. In in

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

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

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

footage-flying-spherical-object Sure, it can get you nicely killed, <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Solar_Temple> Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

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 wha

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: JanPB

No, they are the same. They are the same. They are the same theories. One theory can be introduced or derived in many different ways. -- Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is standard. Pick any math or physics textbook printed over last 100 years and you'll see this sort of thing all over the place. No, this is correct. I propose that we stop this discussion. The problem is that you are the class

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 11 Hours ago by: Python

Thomas Heger wrote:

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 12 Hours ago by: Mikko

Obviously the one quoted above. More specifically, the usual one. Yes. Without a coordinate system a number is not a coordinate. Units are not relevant in "Zur elektrodynamik bewegter körper". Mikko

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

As I mentioned two possibilities and you certainly exclude only one, you therefore need to say, which one you want to reject. The word 'coordinate' shall have only one meaning in a text. It is absulutely inacceptable to alter the me

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Einstein did something VERY nasty: he reused the symbol tau for two different things. a) One is a time measure called tau b) another one is a function called tau. Now he used the time measure tau from a) in the equation (1/2)*(tau_0

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Oppositely, it is a standard technique of relativity supporters.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

SRT and Einstein's 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies' are two different things. I was talking about Einstein's paper, while you wrote about SRT. Now it is important to notice, that SRT is a theory, which is composed from the id

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 15 Hours ago by: JanPB

Forgot to add: Ricci and Riemann components are with respect to the normalised frame: a dt, a dx, a dy, a dz (as opposed to the coordinate dt, dx, dy, dz). -- Jan

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 15 Hours ago by: JanPB

Yes, it's correct. It's a bit simpler of you use a^2 instead of a. The result is then: R = 6a../a^3 Ricci components (still *using a^2 instead of a*). Let's denote: A = (a.. a - (a.)^2)/a^4 B = (a.. a + (a.)^2)/a^4

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 16 Hours ago by: whodat

That the nice thing about religious freedom in the west today.

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 18 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

"Footage of flying objects violating the laws of physics" This single statement of Scott Bray makes me to believe that there is intelligent alien life which SHIT ON RELATIVITY. Go UFO!

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 20 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

<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

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

https://www.zerohedge.com/military/ufo-hearing-pentagon-shows-declassified-footage-flying-spherical-object UFO Hearing: Pentagon Shows Declassified Footage of Flying Spherical Object WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2022 - 07:05 PM By Gary Bai of The

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 22 Hours ago by: George Hammond

May 18th 2022 Hi Tom Roberts – I know very well who you are from sci.physics.relativity. Perhaps as long as 7 years ago I talked to you there about this metric: |a 0 0 0 | |0 a 0 0 | = the given spacetime metric |0 0 a

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

So, in this Netflix film documentary.."Picture a Scientist" the male scientists walks in the lab and sees the female scientists and ask her..."Are you the janitor?"

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 3 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Looks like they're going to have to ...BLUR those sexy black hole photos..

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

17 Famous Female Scientists Who Helped Change the World These STEM superstars literally changed everything. https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/17-top-female-scientists-who-have-changed-the-worl/ Amid a global push to get more girl

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

So, I saw that Netflix title... https://www.netflix.com/title/81303549 After seeing a few interviews what I get from it is.. All men Scientists in the scientific community feel that *all* women scientists should be working at Pornhub i

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Everybody knows that the Navy are a bunch of pussies. People join the navy to avoid ground warfare. If you see a UFO, SHOOT THE FUCKING THING DOWN!!! Stop being a pussy. Go to Canada. My gosh, i never seen so many pussies in my life

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 3 Hours ago by: JanPB

Sorry, I got carried away by the other part of the derivation. Here the answer is that the derivatives wrt y and z are not present because in the first tau equation the variable x' is not present in the y and z slots of tau.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 6 Hours ago by: Python

Think, Maciej, think.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Even if it wasn't an impudent lie - how would it change the direct measurement result of t'=t in GPS?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 7 Hours ago by: Python

And Newton's laws of motion don't hold good anymore, but it does not matter, right dear "one of the great logician humanity ever had" (LOL)?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 7 Hours ago by: Mikko

When mathematical formulas were first introduced all symbols represented scalars. It was not necessary to say that they are scalars as nobody thought that they could be anything else. It was not even possible to say that tey represent sc

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion TAI and GPS keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 8 Hours ago by: Mikko

It does. As I already said, there is no need to tell what the target audience already knows. No, that is not a possible interpretation. Except that they may be coordinates of another coordinate system. Each coordinate has a diff

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 8 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

[a(t) cannot be completely arbitrary, it must be both finite and non-zero everywhere; otherwise the product is not a valid metric. That implies a(t) > 0 everywhere, and it is often notated λ^2.] [Also: "space metric" => "spaceti

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 14 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

The truth is.. Aioe.org had banned sci.physics.relativity from it's sever. And he simply cannot 'afford' to use a pay service. and his grants have run out...

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 14 Hours ago by: Tom Capizzi

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 somethi

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

No, sorry. An arbitrary value is not a variable, even if you can use a variety of settings. Example: running as a sport. You have distances from 100 m to 42 km for a single run in sport events. Now you want to describe the position

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Vectors and vector equations were already known in the 19th century. Especially in connection to electromagnetism vector equations were state of the art since Maxwell's times. Parenthesises can have different meanings. To distinguish

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

You'll get exactly as much respect from me as you're giving to others, stinker.

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 16 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Your first question was whether the curvature was zero, and the answer is No, not generally. Applying a variable scale factor, such as a(t) to the metric line element generally results in a curved manifold. Then you started talking abo

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 17 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Good data gathering and posting. You forgot to tell about the codification scheme of data, as you only wrote about the TX coding. I put this link, so Starmaker can guess where the black hole can be located.. Maybe, the trajectory was de

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 17 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

If gravity is a curved metric how can it be flat? but why would a parabolic metric create elliptical orbits?

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 17 Hours ago by: George Hammond

[GE Hammond MS Physics] Do you mean that if I plug the following metric into Mathematica: |a 0 0 0 | |0 a 0 0 | = the given spacetime metric |0 0 a 0 | |0 0 0 -a| where: a = a(t) (a is defined as a simple well

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paparios

Dish antenna of 2.1 m. Power through RTG of 245.7 W at launch (decaying 3.5 W per year). Communications via X band at 12 W. At Pluto distance it transmitted 1 kbps. The free space loss at 4.7 billion km including the antenna gains is

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 19 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

Bodkin quite posting BECAUSE HE RAN OUT OF BULLSHIT.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 20 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

Simultaneity is invented by Einstein to save constant light speed of SR. It have no effect on any physical processes in our universe.

Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 20 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

You have no idea or understanding of new physics. Your assertion is based on Einstein's obsolete physics.

Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 20 Hours ago by: JanPB

Nonsense. -- Jan

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Bodkin, is that you? The time zone UTC-5 is the same. I expected that Dono would bite the bait. Bit, anyway, a fish is a fish.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 22 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

Thanks for sharing. Amazing and disturbing how (self-)deluded a single individual can be. PointedEars

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I want to test you, Mr. EE. Detail the following parameters of such mission: - TX power and antenna size of the spacecraft. - Bit rate, modulation and codification schemes used by the spacecraft. - Level of received signal on Earth. - M

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 4 Days 23 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL, what a jerk!!! Scientific missions are sometimes quite more longer than 5 years. Take for example the New Horizons mission. New Horizons is the first mission in NASA's New Frontiers mission category, larger and more expensive than t

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days ago by: The Starmaker

Everything You Wanted To Know About Cross-Posting But Were Afraid To Ask Sometimes, you'll have an issue you think should be discussed in more than one newsgroup. Rather than posting individual messages in each group, you can post the sam

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days ago by: Richard Hertz

Consider this: - 5 years invested (2017-2022) - 7 observatories in the western hemisphere (difficult to synchronize arrays of radio-telescopes, down to 10 nsec in the network) - 8 hours of data collected, corresponding to MW radiation

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days ago by: Richard Hachel

I refuse. R.H.

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

[Follow-Up to sci.physics] Quite simple, dear Newby. If there is a general newsgroup, like sci.physics, with a specialised subgroup, like sci.physics.relativity, then it is bad netiquette to crosspost between the two. If you feel you mus

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days ago by: Clutterfreak

I still see a Halloween pumpkin right in the middle.

Re: #UFOHearings (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 1 Hour ago by: rotchm

Off-topic. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 1 Hour ago by: rotchm

You already asked that, and is off topic. Learn a little respect. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

(which shouldn't exist)???? How stupid can you be...Jan? LOOK, OBSERVE...Your Newsreader, it reads: Newsgroups: There is a letter s at the end of the word...Newgroups. Meaning, More than One newgroup. You add an s and it means more

Re: Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, not generally. The vanishing of the Ricci scalar, and even the Ricci tensor, does not imply the vanishing of the Riemann curvature tensor, which is the actual measure of curvature. This should be obvious, because the vacuum field e

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

If you think "the usual sense of the word" is the extrinsic sense, then none of the mentioned paths are straight, but if you think "the usual sense of the word" is the intrinsic sense, then all of the mentioned paths are straight. You'r

Re: Empirically, you need eXergy to drive to the store.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

By contrast to me, for example, your claims and reactions mark you as not a member of the scientific community. So you are not in a position to make an informed judgment, and your opinion in that regard is irrelevant. True. Nobod

Re: Empirically, you need eXergy to drive to the store.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

Nobody debated that. Apparently it has escaped your attention that I had just falsified several of them. Only that it does not. And claiming otherwise does not change that. PointedEars

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Maybe yous people don't understand the question.. even if i made it simplier for you by using short sentences.. I'll try again. "going by the images.." means, only looking at the photos, not what other peoples opinions are what in thos

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: RichD

~ 12" total This route is the 'straightest', in the usual sense of the word, is it not? That is, it doesn't curve along the glass surface. Hence, according Euclid, it should be the shortest path. Yet it's longer than the correct sol

#UFOHearings

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

#UFOHearings Everything You Wanted To Know About #UFOHearings But Were Afraid To Ask https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1395850826879406080

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 3 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL, so says the unemployed and uneducated completely unknown argentinian EE.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Only metascience remains, in the occult, challenging God (medicine, physics, chemistry, society). Ask Zuckerberg. Engineering and applied hard sciences, for profit, is what only remains. Now go to cry to the corner. As I wrote many time

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Western science IS DEAD???? But you're in the Western part of the world.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And they're particularly laughable when they demonstrate your geocentrism.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 4 Hours ago by: Paparios

Sure, trolls like the Polish janitor who believes he is the best logician mankind has created and is famous for using the Webster dictionary for his science posts, make us all laugh!!!! You are comfortably in a very respectable second pl

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

maluw made me laugh! And better not to ask to Paparios which is his "story" about quasars (quasi stellar objects). His answer WILL BE hilarious. Halton Arp, a REAL astrophysicist, dared to question the narrative of the BBT, as "z" fa

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

I may, if you post on sci.logic.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

Good! You were not wanted, anyway. We do not hire incompetent delusional demented old farts.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 5 Hours ago by: rotchm

So that's the type of person you are! Then how about I go to you, in your room where you are sitting. I will impose my rules onto you. How would you like that? No answer? (requires a yes/no answer). I did not shape/define them

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

You're a dumb, fanatic, lying piece of shit. Forget about any respect. No. And you think it's you that can shape them as you like? For the cause of making true some postulates of some insane crazie - is just? In the context of ma

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 6 Hours ago by: rotchm

Its a definition. Don't you know what a definition is? Whats its purpose, its use? I've now told/explained it to you. Now you should know. You are confused. We were not talking about synching watches. We were talking about the *simu

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

This is one of the biggest bullshit I've ever heard from a guy who understood the theory of relativity. Relativity says exactly the opposite, and if it does not say so, it is because it is badly explained. If I synchronize two similar

Improved Relativity Theory (IRT)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 6 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

The paper in the following link describes an Improved Relativity Theory (IRT). The equations of IRT are valid for use in all applications (includingg gravity). Therefore, IRT is valid to replace SRT and GRT in all applications. http://www.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 6 Hours ago by: rotchm

He is not my guru. He is perhaps yours, but not mine. Don't force your whishes onto others. Learn some respect. If you choose to come here, use *their* rules. And this is also true for most words you use. The meanings of words cha

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Doesn't your "if you are thinking of something else, use a different word." apply? Well, yes, it does. But it's your idiot guru and you who should use different words. The meaning of "time", the meaning of "simultaneity"", the meaning o

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

Your question does not follow. Insufficient information. However, since a cow is a four legged grass eater, then that animal (cow) would be a shark. This terminology is valid for our discussion since you defined your word(s). In differ

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

If I define a shark as a 4-legged grass eater - will sharks start to eat grass, poor halfbrain?

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: rotchm

Can you translate that into the appropriate language (english) ? Or, are you just spamming? Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: rotchm

Given a reference frame which has been coordinated, two events are said to be "simultaneous" when the clocks located at the events in question indicate the same value. See the definition above. It does depend on the inertial frame b

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

For all. A matter of a convention respected globally. Like TAI. Or UTC. Unlike the idiocies of your insane guru.

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And never forget to add 5 points for Tom Roberts for every word written in capital letters.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: Python

You don't even hear that because you put your hands on your ears when people answer you.

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 8 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

J'ai pas trop le temps de faire des cadres, et je préfère y mettre des chats ou de beaux visages, mais si j'avais le temps, je mettrai des belles coquilles manuscrites. Celle-là, venant de Jean-Pierre, est particulièrement crous

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 9 Hours ago by: Python

Face it (I know you won't) Richard, you failed miserably in understanding SR. You are a psychopath, Richard. Being wrong on math or physics is not that a big deal, you are nobody. But the pathological habit you have to consider better t

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 9 Hours ago by: Athel Cornish-Bowden

It's time to remind you of John Baez's crackpot index: 25. 20 points for naming something after yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your name happens to be Evans.) There are other points in the list that

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

The problem with manipulative personalities is that they often manage to pass themselves off as victims. And they accuse those who are right of being confused. Jean-Pierre Messager will explain to us how it is, for example, that he ca

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

No, not really. It is not a group I subscribe to, so all I may see is the occasional cross-post, (which shouldn't exist) Jan

Re: [SR] What is simultaneity? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 10 Hours ago by: Python

This is not a definition. No. Both Poincaré and Einstein seriously asked the same question, thought carefully about it and ended up with similar answers. Since then a lot of people have been considering this problem too, especially to

[SR] What is simultaneity?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Two physical events are said to be simultaneous when they occur at the same time, when they happen at the same instant. But FOR WHOM? A misunderstanding seems to have existed for many decades, probably since 1905, in the minds of scient

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

One non-optimal is up, down, crossing the bottom, up to the fly. Mikko

Is the flat METRIC still FLAT ?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 13 Hours ago by: George Hammond

If I multiply the ordinary flat space metric by an arbitrary function of time: a(t) , will it remain a "flat space-time", IOW will the curvature still be zero? I t say YES but without plugging it into Mathematica and calculating the Ricci

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

as a bright radiation source.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 19 Hours ago by: whodat

There are theories about what might be happening inside a black hole but there is no way to test any of them, including the theories you've posted here.

Re: These assumptions cover a lot of ground.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Dick's DriveIn is a famous Seattle area burger chain from the early days American dive-in culture. Dick's has survived all the McDonalds, Burger King, Wendy's, Taco Times competition. It's half dozen locations still remain Seattle's all

Corrections of false assumptions (was: These assumptions cover a lot of ground.)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 21 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

You should watch <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcqZHYo7ONs> (and the more detailed video referred there) to educate yourself about what you are talking about *before* you are talking about it. One can *prove*, though, that the en

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 22 Hours ago by: rotchm

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. You already done "too much mo

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 22 Hours ago by: Clutterfreak

It's a question that made Turing develop his famous test.

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 22 Hours ago by: Clutterfreak

Ahah.. you're familiar with sci.physics then. How did you get so familiar without interacting with those who frequent this forum? Did you, perhaps, did so under another alias?. Are you, perhaps, doing it all the time under another ali

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 22 Hours ago by: Aldo

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 (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 23 Hours ago by: JanPB

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: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 5 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

What's a female?

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

Sorry about not removing the cross posting, Jan (who avoids sci.physics)

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days ago by: Clutterfreak

I don't know. I assume "Jan" is a female name, plus what she said sounds American female way of reasoning to me. It's the first time I see her post in this forum.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days ago by: Richard Hachel

Precisely, if I start slowly, it means that I intend to walk far. Don't be terrified. You are not going to die. You're just going to be a little shaken up. Stay calm. R.H.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days ago by: patdolan

Stan! You ARE Townes Olson. There is plenty more to discuss...

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 1 Hour ago by: Paul B. Andersen

So there is nothing more to discuss.

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

Is your Mom Hot?

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

There's an amusing side note to this discussion. What the OP is presumably wanting (even though he can't articulate this desire, for obvious reasons) is a univariate derivation at a particular event x,t, rather than a transformation that

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 1 Hour ago by: Clutterfreak

:-))

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 2 Hours ago by: Clutterfreak

Ok Mom.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 2 Hours ago by: RichD

What's the third? -- Rich

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 2 Hours ago by: Paparios

You are so wrong in so many ways that it is funny!!! The black hole at Sagittarius A* has been known for over 70 years, mostly because we can "see" close to 100 stars orbiting it. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S2_(star)) The star

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Merci. R.H.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I wonder how could you "photograph" it in any way, even by using contrast of gases radiating EM waves, like in the promoted "photo" of the BH at the center of the Milky Way. The cretins asserted that gases orbit around the BH at near th

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Because idiot JJ has said, and he can't be wrong like ordinary mortal worms sometimes are.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 4 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

The Question is.. going by the images.. are there any Black Holes in our solar system? The Starmaker wrote:

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 5 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Yes, you are right. It's nonsense all the way. Science doesn't depend on the 'proper' use of words, Jan

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 5 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

It seems the point is the interpolation between the Galilean, transform, and the Lorentz, transform, of course for the invariance of light speed and thus mass-energy equivalence, the Lorentz, after the linear, the Galilean. Of course k

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 5 Hours ago by: Mikko

Already in use Perhaps Too generic as all useful times are observable Sounds like a synonym to "proper time" Sounds too specific, only for downwards movement Sounds more like a feature of something than a time Contradictory as "anis

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

My personal transformations are the same as those of Lorentz. These transformations are obviously valid. But we must not forget one thing that I repeat tirelessly: "The theory of relativity is mathematically very simple, it does not go

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 9 Hours ago by: Paul B. Andersen

g, v and c are constants: x' = f1(x,t) t' = f2(x,t) Let's find the inverse transform by solving these two equations with respect to x and t: On matrix form the equations are: |x'| = | g -gv| |x| |t'| |-gv/c² g | |t| | g -g

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

No, of course not, I'm not going to run away. I am neither a crackpot, nor a thug, nor a troll, nor a bandit. Obviously you are not either. I think the hardest thing is to tune two men (or a married couple) when both are right at the

Re: ISS all night visibility coming up soon (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 10 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

And, did you see the ISS, at your midnight? Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 11 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Well, he did discover that: If only he could follow up on that... Jan

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 12 Hours ago by: JanPB

Sigh. Yet another crackpot. -- Jan

Re: ISS all night visibility coming up soon (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And the clocks of GPS will indicate t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did. Any of you denialists is going to look at them?

Re: A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

[snip 'not entirely clear' material] Yes, this is precisely why sci.physics.research was set up. It is also the reason why sci.physics.research does not contain the morasses of junk that you find in sci.physics and sci.physics.relativit

A Theory of All

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 14 Hours ago by: Julio Di Egidio

For the record. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: A Theory of All Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 08:52:34 +0200 From: Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> To: hees@itp.uni-frankfurt.de Beginners questions and other bullshit

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 14 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You didn't mention them originally because you overlooked them, but when I mentioned them to correct your claim that there were just three straight paths, you repeated that the multiplicity of paths supported the idea that the riddle invo

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 14 Hours ago by: Mikko

That I didn't mention them does not mean that I considered them relevant. Quite obviously. Mikko

Real time, real simultaneity

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

UTC, GPS, TAI, zone times Two events are simultaneous when its TAI/GPS/UTC time coordinate is equal. That's how things are in the world we inhabit. Your bunch of idiots can scream "NOOOOOOOOO!!!!" as much as you want, nothing is going to c

Who duh thunk it?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 16 Hours ago by: Stephane Guenette

Psalm 19:1 The seventh house is rising fast You're a natural with a horse or a rat I think you'll hate my zodiac sign The shadow exposes your horny horns The Obamanation of Desolation https://postimg.cc/cKy5jGK5 On Saturday, 14 May 2022

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

Yes it is.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

It is a proof. I asked if any of the steps seemed wrong or unclear to you, and you were unable to point to any, so the proof stands unchallenged. Do you dispute any of the steps? If so, which one(s)? It's the same proof, regardless of

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

Yes yes yes! The first two imply the two others. It also implies that v = v'. Exactly. We do not want any constraint on v'. You want to find all it's possible values. And we find that the only possible one is v=v'. No I did not.

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: Tom Capizzi

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 tro

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

Are you saying you have a short attention span?

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

This is not a proof. It is a proposition. Now you need to prove it. Prove your "Proof:" I dare you. Words won't help you here. Same with v = v' in the LTs

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

No! No! No! Given ALL FOUR equations, show that v = v'. To only take the first two as given is to put no constrain on v'. Stan just doesn't get this and therefor gets confused. Learning to prove things with equations eliminates the con

Re: Special Relativity Fatal Error (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

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 a

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

To be consistent, your premise is the two pairs of equations x'=x-vt t'=t x=x'+v't' t=t' and you want to convince yourself (because for some unfathomable reason it isn't self-evident to you) that v'=v. Proof: The first two equations

Special Relativity Fatal Error

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: Tom Capizzi

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 s

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

Given the first two equations, you want the show that v = v'. There are many ways to show this. I have shown you one way, and you agreed to it. Another way to show it, is, suppose that v<> v' and arrive at a contradiction. But doing it

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Watch me do a proper proof Stan. I'm going to prove that v = v' for the Galilean transforms. Premise: x' = x - vt x = x' + v't' t = t' Proof: x' + x = x' + x - vt + v't' 0 = - vt + v't' 0 = - vt + v't vt = v't v = v'

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Which part of the proof do you think is imprecise, or wrong, or even unclear? Do you dispute that you first two equations trivially imply x = g(v)[x'+ vt'] and t = g(v)[t' + vx'/c^2] ? Do you need to be shown (yet again) the simple alge

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

That's a lie on your part. I fully follow what he says and I accept his proof/argument too.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Ha! I have found the key to Stan. He can't write proofs in the precise language of mathematics. Which is tantamount to saying he can't prove anything to anyone but himself. Stan, excuse me if I decline to read your midrashing on things

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 19 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

I'll be happy to. It would help if you could narrow down what step in that two-sentence proof you dispute. Let's take tiny baby steps. Here's the first clause of the first sentence: "The first two equations trivially imply x = g(v)[x'

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Okay Stan, I'll ask. You want me to ask you if your argument is unclear. Your argument is completely unclear. It will be crystal clear if you cast the above paragraph in English into well formed strings of algebra. I'm asking you to d

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, the argument does not pre-suppose that v' = v, it is based purely on the four posited equations. The first two equations trivially imply x = g(v)[ x' + vt' ] and t = g(v)[ t' + vx'/c^2 ], so your second two equations are true for arb

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Here's a challenge for you Stan. Let's suppose you have proved v = v' in your post above. Can you now cast those sentences in English where you make your proof into wellformed strings of algebra? I say you are incapable of that sort of

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That isn't an answer. I've explained the self-contradiction in your claims.. You see, your denial of modern science has nothing to do with acceleration at all. You disagree with proposition (1), which has nothing to do with acceleratio

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan, you are hopeless. Nothing penetrates your thick skull. You probably don't even know that your argument is v = v' if and only if v = v'. What is it about proofing that you just can't understand?

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

Your reply is in the wrong language. Be consistent: if you are discussing an English, continue the discussion in English.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

No answer? Can you answer that one?

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Bon, je vois que vous faites exprès de ne rien comprendre. Et sur ça, je suis désolé, mais je ne peux rien faire. According to the holy proverb: "Richard Hachel could not give water to donkeys that were not thirsty". R.H.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The trivial derivation has been presented to you many times, in many different forms. Again, it's grade school algebra to show that the first two equations imply x = g( v )[ x' + vt' ] t = g( v )[ t' + vx'/c^2 ] so your second two equat

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You're confusing propositions (1) and (2). Proposition (1) does not involve any accelerations at all, it simply says that the elapsed proper time along the unaccelerated path from any given event xi,ti to any other (time-like separated)

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Event clues may not change the laws of physics, but their position does. The Pythagorean theorem has been the same for four thousand years. It is unchanging. But if I apply it to three aligned points, it doesn't work. The example I a

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 21 Hours ago by: patdolan

rotchm, is this the proof you proffer? If so then you are being just too pigheaded to understand the problem we are addressing here. STOP READING RIGHT HERE. STAND UP. LIFT ONE FOOT OFF THE FLOOR. RUB YOUR STOMACH AND PAT YOUR DOLAN.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Yes, but for that, the two rockets MUST go off together at the same time. The watches of the two rockets are triggered at this instant, and the watches are triggered when they arrive simultaneously at the final point. This is the probl

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 22 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Please answer the question. Nope. Remember, you have already agreed that the elapsed time for an unaccelerated path between two given events xi,ti and xj,tj is sqrt[(tj-ti)^2 - (xj-xi)^2] . This applies to any two (timelike separated)

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

tau0. Ca me rappelle les prêts à taux zéro, LOL. Nan, sans rire, tu y crois aux conneries que tu racontes? tau0. E1 is the start event of the rocket or particle. E2 is the mid-course event (in proper time; not in distance, h

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 22 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You contradict yourself, because we can shift the labels of the events, so instead of labeling these events with indices 2,3,4 we are going to label them with indices 1,2,3, so what you have claimed is .. . tau2 - tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 -

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 23 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Seems either "walk around to fly, jump over straight line", or "jump over straight line, walk around to fly". Or, you know, scuttle, I suppose spiders jump, and scuttle. Outside is convex, inside is concave. The catenary is a usual f

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 6 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Correct Incorrect Correct Incorrect Incorrect Correct Easy. R.H.

Re: THE BIG SUCK THEORY

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days ago by: Joseph Taylor

YOu are like your theory. You both SUCK

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days ago by: The Starmaker

but first of course he will try to convince Aoie.org to reinstate the newsgroup... but that is going to be differcult if China bribed Aoie.org to blacklist sci.physics.relativity. Since China already bribed The Biden Adminstration...wa

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days ago by: Stan Fultoni

You are lying again. First you said it was correct, then incorrect, then correct, then incorrect... and so on. That is insane. Consider a fourth event e4 on the same accelerating path, when the clock's proper time is tau4. We have th

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days ago by: Richard Hachel

But no ! I said your equation was correct. That she was good in the first case, and the third case. But that the second case posed a problem. I don't see why you say I contradict myself. I say the equation is correct. EXCEPT in the

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

the odd is looking for a new catfishing idenity...

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, you are flagrantly lying, because in one sentence you admit that for a clock going from xi,ti to event xj,tj the elapsed proper time is taui - tauj = sqrt[(tj-ti)^2 - (xj-xi)^2], and in the next sentence you deny it. That is lying. I

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: JanPB

It is. And you can differentiate wrt it. Einstein is using an overkill to solve this problem, BTW. The tau function is presumed linear so its coefficients can be found by a bit of algebra, no calculus is needed. But it would be more wo

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hachel

But I'm not lying, I'm saying it's okay. My complaints don't go there. My grievances go to the formulation of the relativists' equations. I say that not only is it not beautiful, but that it ultimately leads to obviously absurd and fa

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: whodat

I see nothing to connect the postings you refer to (and provided a link) to Odd Bodkin.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

I've found Bodkin. He switched fields to write about from relativity to geopolitics, at ZeroHedge. As usual, he's taking a beating from other posters. The novelty that ZeroHedge has is that every forum member can vote up or down other po

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Again you contradict yourself. You are now saying that the elapsed proper time for the clock as it goes a coordinate distance |x2-x1| = 8 in a coordinate time |t2-t1| = 10 is given by tau2 - tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], but this i

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Are you really buying this bullshit? A simple analysis of Python's mumble, or of the mumble of his idiot gurus reveals it's only MANDATORY for their opponents.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It can be? R.H.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

In fact, when he poses this equation, he means that ds is constant. That is to say that the speed of light is constant by change of frame of reference. It is an innocent and silly truth. A dog is a dog, black is black, and when a swal

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Python

This is not how sciences works, claims without support or arguments are useless. It is not a democracy. The point is not to "love", the point is that it can be proven you have produced bullshit.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Everyone makes the judgments they want. This is scientific democracy. You have the right not to love. R.H.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I will answer your question. We assume a clock moving in a given reference frame. At time t1, for me, it is at (40,0,0). Coordonates second-light. At time t2, it is at (32,0,0). It has therefore traveled x=8, and I note on my watch t

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Python

No you don't understand what LT are about, especially not the time coordinate. You've shown numerous times you don't. It is likely you'll never do. You didn't "improve" anything, you've produces a pile of sh*t.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Oui, évidemment. Maintenant, on peut très bien comprendre les choses sans réellement les définir. Ou les définir sans les comprendre. L'épicier chinois comprendra que je définis quelque chose de précis en lui disant que

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

It's only ideal for your bunch of brainwashed halfbrains; serious people doing serious measurements in the real world have other preferences.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Feel free to write the answer in whatever way you like, but please the question. In terms of a given system of inertial coordinates x,t, if an ideal clock moves uniformly (no acceleration) from the event with coordinates x1,t1 to the even

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The obviousness is certainly contingent on the stated parameters and other conditions. If we start talking about changing the conditions of the problem, then we can change the answer as well as the obviousness of some of the alternatives.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

LOL. Ce sont les transformations de Lorentz. :)) R.H.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I don't like this way of writing things and making them understood by students. But hey, everyone does what they want. In my case, we write things like this: To²=Tr²+Et² Tr is the proper time, ie the real time of the object. To i

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Python

Non linear atrociously ugly equations, necessarily wrong (incompatible with Newton's laws of motion, even at low speed approximation), for whatever definition of variables you have (that you didn't provide anyway, as usual). This is utt

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

It appears to me that the mad scientists took their info to the ...'Art Dept.' and told them, "Gimme a Black Hole without looking like it was retouch in Photoshop!" And the 'art dept' genius blurred it so that it appears to be a black hol

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

As said, even the most bombastic name will make it important somehow.

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

According to science, the elapsed proper time along a uniform path (no acceleration) between two given events ei and ej is sqrt[(ti-tj)^2) - (xi-xj)^2)]. You previously agreed with this, but now that you've seen it leads to a contradicti

Re: [SR] Trouver le mot juste (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Doesn't matter. Even the nicest name will make them neither usable nor important.

[SR] Trouver le mot juste

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It can be important, in science, to define things well. But it's not always easy. I gave Hachel's transformations (it's me: the most beautiful, the biggest, the most awesome). A small image is there. <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?F02w

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 4 Hours ago by: Mikko

The optimum path does not involve the bottom because the numbers in the problem statement ara what they are. With some other numbers the path crossing the bottom is shorter. Meaning of numbers is not obvious to everybody. Therefore I wou

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No, poor stinker, a'm not asking for any education from either you or any other brainwashed Shit's follower. It's nothing but a delusion of yours. I'm just demonstrating the obvious - you have NO answers for the simplest questions. You'r

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Well, actually a LIE is from you, poor stinker. Nothing else expected, of course.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Last I heard we were talking about soup of the day - .... I kept telling him that I figured he wanted all physics with that, just to make sure, .... It kind of reminds me, ..., of Sam Wormley. Now I enjoy Sam, though he actually post

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

You're asking for education from people you insult ("stinker", "moroning propaganda", ...) while showing every day here that you have no brain, Maciej? You can go fuck yourself. We have fun with you, we won't educate you. LOL....

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That's a lie. Remember, I said "Your first claim (1) is true, but your second claim (2) is false. Agreed?", and you replied: So, you are now retracting that statement, and you now agree that what you have been claiming up to today has b

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: rotchm

Off topic. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The point is that the relevant portion of the space is Euclidean, both metrically and topologically, since it is equally obvious that (1) the optimum path does not involve circumnavigations, and (2) the optimum path does not involve the b

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: rotchm

Nope, that is a LIE from the fanatic trash that you are.

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Oh, really? Do you have many experiments supporting that it deosn't? Doesn't it also refer to a specific unit, poor stinker? And why do your fellow stinkers refer such a specific unit so often in their moronic propaganda ravings?

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

Still struggling with Peano, Maciej? SAD. *sigh* the meaning of time in physics does not rely on a specific unit (while the opposite is not true, but you're too dumb to notice, right?) It should be terrible to be you Maciej...

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: "The same meanings" (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 6 Hours ago by: Python

This is plain wrong. On all aspects. How can you be such an IDIOT, Maciej?

"The same meanings"

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Sorry, poor stinker - a mistake. Up to 1968 (afair) the meaning of time was referring to Earth-Sun cycles, since then it is referring to Cs frequency. VERY different. Up to 1968 time was really galilean even in your moronic church; an

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 6 Hours ago by: Python

Maciej Wozniak wrote:

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 7 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Ce n'est pas du narcissisme, mais de la tristesse. R.H.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 7 Hours ago by: Paparios

I have also a PhD in EE I was one of the responsible for starting our research group in Astro Engineering, which in 2009 (together with professors from the Astrophysics Institute) evolved into the Astro Engineering Center (https://www.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

In case you haven't noticed, your reply is off-topic. Spam reported.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 7 Hours ago by: Python

Oh, a new one. How is Einstein's 1905 paper non consistent, Maciej? Oh, a new one. How come it "can be defended" now (thank you, my King) and couldn't be then as the modern theory end up with EXACTLY the same set of equations and the sa

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Real clocks of real GPS keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did. No single fucken experiment is supporting your insane screams that they're improper. Sorry.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Qui est le narcissisme humain; but no way un énorme problème.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Bull shit. The problem is described as Euclidean and solved as Euclidean. Since your idiot guru has refuted basic math - your moronic ideology is doing everything to discredit it. That's all. Who said the route of the spider will be stra

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

The terrible thing about this story is that scientific dogma, based on experimentation, is much more difficult to destroy than religious dogma, based on imagination. But sometimes the two dogmas come together. In that they have "false i

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Bref, ils l'ont édulcorée. Il fallait la révolutionner. Seul moi pouvait le faire. Mais un énorme problème, qui est le narcissisme humain va alors entrer en scène. Pas le mien, évident, LOL. On me signale sans cesse qu

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 8 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Oui, c'est vrai. Je le sais. Je l'ai dit. Einstein a fait bien plus dévier les idées de Poincaré qu'il ne les a portées plus en avant. Mais quand je le dis, tout le monde m'accuse d'être un criminel de guerre. R.H.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Einstein's mumble was not even consistent. Currently accepted theory is a bit different from the 1905 version. They did some improvements around, making it a bit less absurdic; now it can be defended. In 1905 it couldn't be. Somehow

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 12 Hours ago by: Mikko

At the time it was commonly thought that all formulas, or at least the useful ones, were always about numbers and only numbers, as most formulas indeed were. Therefore it wast not necessary to point out that a symbol in a formula represe

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 13 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

the blurry one https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1314447384261193728/photo/1 and my sharpen version one https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1314447384261193728/photo/2 Are they going to repeat the same process over and over

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

That there is more than one straight path is sufficient to show that the space is non-Euclidean. It is true that there are infinitely many paths but obviously the shortest path is one of the three I mentioned. The glass is more than ju

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

WHAT? The situation is EXTREMELY simple: You have a coordinate system K and a copy of K set into motion along the x-axis of K with velocity v. Now both systems use the same unit vectors, which point into the same directions, but the

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Am 15.05.2022 um 04:49 schrieb JanPB:

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Szelenski looks like a truck driver for me or the man from the gas pump and has absolutely nothing, what I would associate with a president (even from the tiniest banana-republic). So, I thought, that the guy is a fake and certainly an

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Miguelito, we both hold an EE degree plus a couple of Master degrees, and we have about the same age. I'm not going to enter into a silly contest "I know more than you" type. We both know the bases behind what I wrote before. It comes

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 17 Hours ago by: patdolan

You might as well report your wimpy bicep while you are reporting spam. I'll bet that bicep is about as soft and gooey as a loaf of spam too.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

Are you saying that you do not have the skills to search this thread? If you are lacking in such skills, then you have no business being here. You are now obviously just a loser trolling. Spam reported.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 18 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is just the 1905 way of saying "let's differentiate this equation with respect to x' ". The differentiation means we consider several instances of the experiment, each at different x' value, and compute the limit of the relevan

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

rotchm, give me your proof again, so that I may consider it anew.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 18 Hours ago by: JanPB

"SubTRacted". There is no "s' before the "tr". No. It increases according to x = x_0 + v*(t - t_0), where (t_0, x_0) is the initial condition. That's why x - vt = x_0 - v*t_0 = constant. No, this is incorrect. You are stuck at thi

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

And you were proven that v does equal v'. A lie on your part. You said such a proof could not be done. I gave you the proof. You saw the proof and you acknowledged that I was right, that v = v'. And no where did you argue that my p

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 7 Days 23 Hours ago by: Paparios

So what? Everybody, with a little bit of knowledge of photography, knows that when the light sources (like planets) are dim, you need to enlarge your exposure time. More than 100 years ago, they used telescopes which exposed the film for

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days ago by: patdolan

On the subject of star formation, there are no extant images of a star ever coming to life; either by means of the force of gravity or in any other way. Gravitational star formation remains an unproven theory. The Horse Head Nebula and

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days ago by: Richard Hertz

MULTI-SOURCE, MULTIWAVELENGTH, LONG EXPOSURE IMAGE OF M31 ANDROMEDA GALAXY https://sci.esa.int/web/herschel/-/48182-multiwavelength-images-of-the-andromeda-galaxy-m31 QUOTE: All three images, at far-infrared, optical and X-ray waveleng

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

Wait, you posed three different questions here, and I've thoroughly explained each one. First you claimed v' was not v, and that was debunked. Then you claimed v=c, and that was debunked. Then you claimed the velocity composition formu

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL, you continue to write funny and totally wrong nonsense..... Learn a bit (that is an impossible mission for you) in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_astronomy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_astronomy https://en.wikiped

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

For anyone who didn't understand the depth and breadth of self- deprecation what follows is an example of an ever so slightly more sophisticated version. I call this one "exposing one's insanity." In order to be convincing, there needs

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Calculus doesn't choke, and anyway there is no need for calculus in this riddle, since it's just a straight line on a flat surface (unfolded) between two specified points at the opposite corners of a rectangle with edges lengths 4" and 3"

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan, You obviously want to substitute your own problem for my problem. You are recalcitrant and ineluctable in this regard. Given your situation right now, I don't blame you. At least the vanquished rotchm had the honor to surrender

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Excerpt from https://blogs.futura-sciences.com/e-luminet/2019/05/23/40-years-of-black-hole-imaging-2-colors-and-movies-1989-1993/ ***************************** The black hole visualizations obtained by Jean-Alain Marck not only were a v

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

There is no hallucination, this is simply the derivation of the velocity composition formula, which involves three mutual speeds, namely the speed u of an object in terms of S', the speed v of S' in terms of S, and the speed (call it w)

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

It is you who are about to get the lesson Stan. In your desperation to free yourself from my trap you have apparently hallucinated a 3rd object of interest for which we need to work out the coordinate velocity in the two FoRs of interest

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 3 Hours ago by: RichD

Yes. And when aimed correctly, Fermat tells us the null geodesic minimizes the time of flight from spider to fly. Very convenient and intelligent, considering that the spider values time over length optimization. We can also approa

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 3 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

It is ISS-henge tomorrow! Quite possible that you can see ISS five times on this one single night, even at a time close to midnight, Jan

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 3 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

So, you still have no substantive response at all to the thorough debunking of your fallacious pseudo-reasoning, and are still too proud to ask for help understanding the velocity addition derivation. Until you can bring yourself to actu

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

A last gasp from Stan. Poor fella...listen how he mumbles incoherently...it sounds like he believes himself to be a greater educator Khan, the man who brought higher education to the masses and watched by millions of people around the wo

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 4 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Nope, you have agreed that what you called v' is actually v, which is the relative speed between the two systems of coordinates x,t and x',t'. This means that an interval along the path of an object at rest in x',t' has ∆x'=0 and ∆x/

Imbecile Pat Dolan perseveres (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

ok ok Wrong. Imbecile. you can't do basic algebra. Yep Yep Yep

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

********************* THREAD DIGEST ********************* 1) Dolan introduced the possibility that the v in the Galilean Transforms many not have the same magnitude for observers O and O' in two different Galilean frames of references.

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 5 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That is a lie. Remember, I said "Your first claim (1) is true, but your second claim (2) is false. Agreed?", and you replied: So, you now agree that what you have been claiming up to today has been self-contradictory, and you are now c

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 10 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

[snip] https://blogs.futura-sciences.com/e-luminet/2018/03/07/45-years-black-hole-imaging-1-early-work-1972-1988/ https://blogs.futura-sciences.com/e-luminet/2019/05/23/40-years-of-black-hole-imaging-2-colors-and-movies-1989-1993/ https:

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 11 Hours ago by: Cubic Zirconium

Just had to comment after reading this thread this morning, this really gave me a great laugh. You all have more patience than I with engaging with such trolls (or lunatics). Also another eyewitness testimony here: The ISS does very much

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 11 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

C'est ça qui n'est pas correct. La mathématique peut paraître bonne, mais l'espace-temps n'est pas fait comme ça. Vous comprenez mon grief? Vous partez de l'hypothèse d'un espace-temps particulier, espace-temps utilisé dep

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 11 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I didn't say that exactly. I said that the proper time between two given events is identical whether one moves at constant speed or at uniformly accelerated speed. We will therefore have, very surprisingly, Tr(constant)=Tr(accelerated)

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 11 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You contradict yourself. You said (1) The elapsed proper time along a uniform path (no acceleration) between two given events ei and ej is sqrt[(ti-tj)^2) - (xi-xj)^2)]. (2) The elapsed proper time along a path undergoing constant proper

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 12 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Yes. NOOOO!!! Yes. (tau2-tau1) + (tau3-tau2) = 2*(tau3-tau1) It's not that your calculations aren't good, it's just that your relativistic metric isn't the right one. It's a bit like asking a sailor who goes around the wor

Re: [SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips) (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 12 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Your claims are self-contradictory, because, for any three events e1,e2,e3 on a constantly accelerating path, where the accelerating clock reads the proper time values tau1,tau2,tau3, your claim is that .. . tau2 - tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 12 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, there are infinitely many straight paths, involving circumnavigation of the cylinder, but those are obviously not relevant. The fact that we can go half way around in either direction is also trivial. Nope, the "glass" is idealized

[SR] The traveler of Tau Ceti (in half trips)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 12 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

How to resolve the problem of half trips. <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?TjiE_dhiOA3sOGoMgjX7yZneDUU@jntp/Data.Media:1> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=TjiE_dhiOA3sOGoMgjX7yZneDUU@jntp> R.H.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

Topologically a glass is equivalent to a ball but for the problem it isn't. Locally most of its surface is Euclidean but the problem isn't local. One of Euclid's axioms is two distinct points can be connected with one and only one straig

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

The point is: if one can from what you have said prove that 1 = 0 then one can from what you have said prove everything, including that everything you have said is wrong. Mikko

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Neither Einstein was a physicist/astronomer. Just a fucking hyper-hiped cretin with an undeserved worldwide fame, received by most heads of state and political top dogs in his 1921-1925 fund raising world tour. Previously, he was brought

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Didn't know, the Selenski is also an astrophysicist. I always thought, he is an actor, who played a main character in a soap opera as President of the Ukraine. TH

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 16 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

.... It was exceptionally nasty to name the function τ similar to the time measure τ, because the function τ is actually a coordinate transformation between K and k, which creates four vectors from four vectors as input. These fou

Crank Richard Hertz goes off the deep end (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 18 Hours ago by: Dono.

You are off your anti-psychotics meds once again, Dick.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 19 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

https://www.infobae.com/?noredirect NOTE: 52 microarcseconds diameter, as exactly predicted by our god Einstein, at 20,000 far away from Earth. Not a single mention of Schwarzschild-Hilbert or similar metrics. Like photographing a donut

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 19 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

No it won't. The SPIDER must aim the flashlight at the fly -- the light itself is incapable of that. The light beam will follow the null geodesic corresponding to its initial conditions, which are determined by the position and orientati

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 20 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Here is a video from sharp back to blurry https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1525273775251419136 https://youtu.be/0a7etYMLqPs i guess they are trying to hide the stuff that is inside a black hole... but i'm in the mood for a j

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The universe might be a cylinder shape, due to gravitational curvature. You call that a flat space? Yes, a cylindrical space is metrically flat. You are confusing an embedding topology involving extrinsic curvature versus intrinsic metr

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

But those two claims imply the three relations that produce the contradiction, so your beliefs are self-contradictory, as explained above.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 8 Days 23 Hours ago by: RichD

At what scale does the locally flat geometry become curved? The given problem is long distance, so the local flatness argument fails. -- Rich

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days ago by: RichD

?? If the spider aims a flashlight into the glass, the light beam will find the shortest path to the fly. Which makes a photon smarter than 95% of the hominids I've met. -- Rich

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days ago by: RichD

The universe might be a cylinder shape, due to gravitational curvature. You call that a flat space? -- Rich

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days ago by: Richard Hachel

No. Both are true. The two improper times are equal, by definition. But what I am saying again, myself, is that the two proper times, in this precise case, are also equal to one another. In both cases, we have: To²=Tr²+Et² With E

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: whodat

You don't even understand how self-deprecation works when an attempted slur fails. Sigh.

Re: Crank Richard Hertz mental unraveling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

A meshugener zol men oyshraybn, un im araynshraybn. They should free a madman, and lock you up.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: Paparios

LOL. Keep posting. Every time you post you show how ignorant are jobless argentinians. We do not see x-rays but we can see our bones in an x-ray! We do not see infrared but fiber optics carry infrared light. We can't see the center of ou

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

Which of your two claims are you now retracting? To remind you, your two claims are: (1) The elapsed proper time along a uniform path (no acceleration) between two given events ei and ej is sqrt[(ti-tj)^2) - (xi-xj)^2)]. (2) The elapse

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

No, asshole. It's not funny to tell a joke to yourself. I better target imbeciles like you.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

Now, all you have to do is take this 'sharpen' photo of the blurry black hole https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1524978633311256577/photo/1 and add around 160 percent blur (Gaussian Blur) and it looks the new fraudulent Black Hole p

Re: Crank Richard Hertz mental unraveling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

Ignorant cretin, you don't know shit about radio interferometry and their limitations, with respect to optical telescopes, which have 140,000 times more power to resolve spatial information at the designated target, far away. You barely

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I see you don't understand what I'm saying. I will prepare a small explanatory text that I will post maybe tomorrow if I have time. On the other hand, I understand your grievances. But you can't make an omelette without at least break

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

Self-deprecation should fill that gape rather nicely.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

v.v' are the relative speeds between the frames S and S'. They have nothing to do with ∆x/∆t and ∆x'/∆t' . You being a pathological imbecile will never understand this despite this being explained to you multiple times.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

None of those three expressions are correct (for an accelerating path), but YOU are affirming that all three of them are correct. Remember, you claim that the elapsed proper time along a uniform path (no acceleration) between two given e

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

Then again, it could be that lashing out is the only thing that makes your life worth living. I think it unfortunate this appears to be a legitimate observation. Only you can make yourself better. Ordinarily that is a pretty easy step.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

Nope. I am nobody's sock and I have no socks. Could you have picked a more disgusting poster to attempt to align me with? So the question is just a straight out insult because you were not able to answer a physics question I raised. Pl

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

You have not presented a derivation of the velocity addition formula, you have presented a childishly absurd pseudo-derivation of the ridiculous claim that the Lorentz transformation implies v=c. Your fallacious pseudo-reasoning was deb

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Dono, if you were going to represent v' in coordinate space and time, how would YOU do it? Just plain v ? If so, then how would YOU represent v ?

Re: Crank Richard Hertz mental unraveling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Where did you get your haircut, the pet shop?

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 3 Hours ago by: Dono.

This is ok This is wrong since, like the idiot you are, you are taking v' to be equal to ∆x'/∆t' Face it, Pattycakes, you are inept. No. Idiot.

Crank Richard Hertz mental unraveling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

Dick, It is entertaining to watch your mental unraveling. You need to stuff in as much posts, soon you will not be able to write, not being able to speak follows close behind.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Exoplanets, gravity waves, black holes. NSF Grant Boondoggles. I remember one time at a LIGO meeting in Bellevue on the Microsoft campus right after the wave event, I put the question...

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Slippery Stan, why are you responding to me again instead of Khan's video? Instruct this forum how Khan's derivation is different from mine.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Another ignorant, this time a chileno, who should know better, being a retired EE (even his background is on packet networking). Tell me, Miguelito, once you accept that a "photograph" of microwave radiation can be done by warping 30 Ghz

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Let "Tr1"="Tr2"="Tr3"/2 et x1+x2=x3 Tr1² = To1² - (x1/c)² ? ? ? Tr3² = To3² - (x3/c)² Yes. But is correct your second affirmation? R.H.

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 6 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL........you continue to make our days with all the nonsense you post. Keep up posting them.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The space has a non-Euclidean *global* topology, but it is locally intrinsically flat everywhere except the rim (which is removable in this idealization of a thin surface).

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

As explained before, the contradiction is that for any three events e1,e2,e3 on a constantly accelerating path, where the accelerating clock reads the proper time values tau1,tau2,tau3, your claim is that tau2-tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 -

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Again, your absurd claim that the Lorentz transformation implies v=c has been thoroughly debunked (see above). Your mistake was not realizing that the interval you are referring to has dx'/dt' = -v and dx/dt = 0. If you need more help

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 8 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

What are you talking about, Maciej? I am explaining here something very important. I am saying that there are, in the currently accepted theory of relativity, paradoxes and absurdities. I beg you to believe that when you say these things

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 8 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan, you BSer. Have a look: https://www.khanacademy.org/science/physics/special-relativity/einstein-velocity-addition/v/einstein-velocity-addition-formula-derivation Let me know if there is anything in this video that you don't unders

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 10 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

So did the beliefs of your idiot guru, as explained many times here.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I don't understand this story of the sum of square roots being equal to zero. What do you want to talk about? R.H.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

See, poor halfbrain: the Euclidean axiom is "between two points there is exactly one straight path". It is not "between two points there is exactly one optimal path". As long as even your bunch of idiots is seeing exactly one straight p

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

This is the equation: 1/2*(1/(c −v) + 1/(c +v))* ∂τ/∂t = ∂τ/∂x' + 1/(c +v)* ∂τ/∂t As justification for this equation Einstein wrote: "Hence, if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,..." I have complained, that x' ca

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 14 Hours ago by: Mikko

There are two distinct optimal paths and one non-optimal straight path so the space is not Euclidean. Mikko

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

So, relativistic morons are waving their arms and screaming "EVERYTHING IS SUPPORTING OUR BELOVED SHIT!!!!!". What's so special about it?

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Gases are spinning around the BH at almost the speed of light, they said. It causes that blobs of light turn around the BH several times per minute, they said. It was difficult to obtain an HD pic due to the above, they said. Also, we hav

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 15 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

They couldn't get it any more bluuryerrr? Here is the sharp version: https://twitter.com/Starmaker111/status/1524978633311256577/photo/1 Richard Hertz wrote:

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Black Hole In The Milky Way Center Revealed! Million Wonderful People Live Stream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd6q8B7D8qE

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

It's worthy to note that other fossilized minds have also disappeared from this NG. It seems that "the dirty dozen" is discouraged from posting here, given that the "US leg" is M.I.A. I can recall some names like: - JanPB - Moortel - Py

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

And you are such a fucking asshole that DO NOT UNDERSTAND that optical frequencies are 100,000 HIGHER than radio signals in the S band, between 3 and 30 Ghz. Nothing non-optical can provide A FUCKING PHOTOGRAPH, imbecile! https://www.ira

Re: BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 17 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Actually, it is known as Sagittarius A* (pronounced as A-star)... as any knowledgeable amateur astronomer would know... it has been studied in detail for decades now and the science is pretty well accepted by the scientific community... a

BREAKING: First image of supermassive black hole at the center of the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 17 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

FEEDING THE MIND OF PEOPLE WITH CRAP LIKE LIGO AND GRAVITATIONAL WAVES. This was announced today on Western media. ******************************************* https://eventhorizontelescope.org/blog/astronomers-reveal-first-image-black-hol

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 18 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Again, you are writing the relations for a particle at rest in x,t, which means dx/dt = 0 and d'x/dt' = -v, so the right side of the above equation is simply dx'/dt', which you have found is equal to dx'/dt'. Magnificent. Again, for th

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

Again, you made basic mistakes in there. But since You've shown yourself to be an idiot who can't even manage basic math, there is no point in discussing with you. You're just too "dumb". Go take a little high school math and then maybe

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

"Big egos are big shields for lots of empty space." - Diana Black

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

x' = g(v)(x - vt) [A] t' = g(v)(t - vx/c^2) [B] ∆x'/∆t' = g(v)(∆x-v∆t)/g(v)(∆t-v∆x/c^2) [2] ∆x'/∆t' = (∆x-v∆t)/(∆t-v∆x/c^2) [3] ∆x'/∆t' = (∆x+[∆x'∆t/∆t'])/(∆t+∆x∆x'/∆t'c^2) [4] ∆x'∆t/

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

Well, I already answered you. You agreed that I was right in that you are wrong. That is all that matters in this thread. Now you are asking you question. For that , you must start a new thread. And I suggest you correct the many errors

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

This is a trivial riddle, and no one in their right mind would even think of calculus or calculus of variations to solve such a simple problem. A little high school geometry/math suffices.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 19 Hours ago by: Dono.

THE delusional idiot of the village.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Just who do you think you are gainsaying, Stan? Who do you think you are talking to? At least rotchm has the presence of mind to remain silent after he has been bested by The man who broke arithmetic The man who broke the spacetime in

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 20 Hours ago by: Dono.

I am not encouraging your utter stupidity mixed with disgusting laziness. It is 9-th grade algebra, I take it that you flunked it, idiot.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 22 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Again, the problem is that your beliefs imply 1 = 0, as explained in detail in the previous message.

Re: the optimizing spider (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 22 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Obviously 5", but this isn't an example of a curved manifold, because the intrinsic curvature of a cylindrical surface is zero, i.e., the surface of a cylinder is intrinsically flat.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 9 Days 23 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Well, c (like v) has dimensional units, so its numerical value can indeed be pi or e or anything else with a suitable choice of units. That is not physically significant. What matters are dimensionless ratios, such as v/c, which equal

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days ago by: patdolan

Yes Stan, c = 1 too. But that's the nature of ex falso quodlibet. From falsity anything follows. You can deduce that c or v is equal to pi or e. It doesn't matter when the entire logical structure is corrupt and rotten from within. Is

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Rather impossible than sad.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

That's the post that is debunked (for the second time) above (with units so c=1). Is there anything about this debunking of your claim that you think is wrong or unclear?

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Paul Alsing

You are projecting again, Richard...

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: patdolan

Stan my boy, did you miss the post when I came around to your way of thinking then slaughtered the LTs based on your conclusions? Are you in shock and therefore catatonically arguing an argument that you have already won? Albeit at the c

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Thomas Heger

.... Sure, I made a mistake, because the vector for dislocation would add, but the numerical values should be substracted. IOW: the distance between the zero spot of K and the zero spot of k increases according to distance(t) = v*t.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

It must be sad for someone with such religious belief on the cult of relativity REALIZING that he has been deceived by his church all this time. Nothing to be shown as a real proof that relativity has the slightest bit of truth and that'

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hachel

I said that there was a fundamental relation which linked proper time and improper (observable) time. We have To²=Tr²+Et² Et=x/c Take the case of a twin who leaves the earth for 18 years of his own time (we don't know at what cons

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 1 Hour ago by: Thomas Heger

Well, no, I do not agree. Einstein made no distinction between different types of mathematical objects, but did not only use scalars. So, any Latin letter can represent several types of objects and Einstein gave no hints, which would

the optimizing spider

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 2 Hours ago by: RichD

Given a Tom Collins glass, 4" high, 6" circumference. A spider sits on the outside, 1" from the bottom. A fly lands on the inside, 1" from the top, on the opposite side. The spider, who aced the calculus of variations, takes the shortest

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Bod? Maybe realized? No.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

It isn't a matter of perception. Your claims amount to the assertion that 1 = 0. This is because you say the difference between the sum of the first two square roots and the third square root is zero, but it is not zero (unless your acc

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 2 Hours ago by: JanPB

You are changing the subject. No. What you wrote is incorrect. As in: false. No, this is false. You seem to be stuck at an elementary school level of the meaning of coordinates. According to your definitions x_0 = 0 and ksi_0 = 0.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

As always, your reasoning is fallacious: You acknowledge that what you call v' is v, so just call it v. Given two aligned inertial coordinate systems x,t and x',t' related by Lorentz transformation with parameter v, an object at rest i

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

Well rotchm? Well Stan? What does either of you have to say about being lured and trapped by someone with far more forethought and far more wisdom about all things scientific, philosophic, mathematical and logical than yourselves. Am

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

OR maybe he realized that parroting borrowed knowledge from "best-selling" books on relativity has a limit, unless he gets involved in mathematical backed assertions, which always eluded him, beyond Lorentz Transforms. Repeating the sa

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Like your geocentric method of measuring your interval idiocy?

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

Then do it, dammit! Do it!!!!

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

No one quits an addiction that "cold turkey". Bodkin has either had a medical emergency that he may have survived but by which he has been incapacitated. Or, as Richard Hertz indicates, Bodkin has gone to ground and is cowering in terror

Re: 100 rare brain cancer cases linked to Albert Einstein. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

In 1905, Albert Einstein came up with a formula for an atomic bomb... "If I had foreseen Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I would have torn up my formula in 1905." - Albert Einstein from that moment on, he took the steps needed to build an ato

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

It is trivial algebra (not for you) from the 4 equations: x= g( v )[ x'+ vt' ] x = g( v' )[ x' + v't' ] t = g( v )[ t' +vx'/c^2 ] t = g( v' )[ t' + v'x'/c^2 ] Hint, you need to divide them in pairs in order to get rid of the g(v)

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Show all the steps That got you here. I dare you.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

Participating in this forum has become an addiction for many, and I'm glad that Odd seems to have realized that he has better things to do with his time.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

Now, from the above, any knowledgeable person derives that v'=v. Only the Pat Dolan imbecile derives that x'/t'=c, i.e v'=c. This is why Pat Dolan will die the way he was born: an idiot.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

Pattycakes Repeating your idiocies only proves that you are an idiot. Your mistakes have been pointed out already. Correct solutions (not yours) have been posted.. Repeating your previous idiocies only proves that you can't learn. You we

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: Paparios

And yet you still can't refrain yourself, as the good troll you are, from posting nothing useful....LOL

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Yes I have posted [9] before. And always to great effect. Don't believe me? Look how Stan and rotchm try to ignore it was ever typed. PROVEN: v = v' invalidates the LTs

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Would be hard to say anything useful about some religious mumble of some insane maniacs.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 5 Hours ago by: Paparios

Again, very funny you trolls have nothing useful to say about relativity (which is the subject of the group).

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 6 Hours ago by: Dono.

You have posted this cretinism before. Repeating the same imbecilities doesn;t make them true, it just confirms that you are an imbecile.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Well, you acknowledge that what you call v' is v, so just call it v. Given two aligned inertial coordinate systems x,t and x',t' related by Lorentz transformation with parameter v, the spatial origin of x',t' in terms of x,t has the eq

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

You said it can't be done. We showed you a can and you agree. Therefore you were wrong. You are welcome. This ends the discussion and the thread. If you want to discuss something new, start a new thread. That's how it's done, DuH...

Re: it's about Dono (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

Off topic. Spam reported. I incite others to do the same.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Typographical error : To=Tr.sqrt(1+Vrm²/c²)

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I read very carefully and with great interest the answers you gave me. I understand the difficulties that my assertions and theses may cause, including that they may be perceived as contradictory or absurd. But the things I say, strang

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 10 Hours ago by: Python

*facepalm*

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

In Einstein's text that is simple: all symbols represent scalars unless otherwise specified. You should be clear with your symbols. When discussing Einstein's text, you should use the same conventions. Einstein's x and xi are scalars, s

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 13 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Moroney is barking at sci.physics. He considers that this NG is unworthy of his wisdom and won't come back. Dono is in "vigilante mode", waiting to jump at anybody's throat if it's mentioned that Einstein was a complete hoax, never re

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No, Bodkin, you're not. One barking idiot less.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

This is the last post that Bodkin made before aioe.org banned sci.physics.relativity, due to abuse complains. It was on Mon, 2 May 2022 10:34:04 -0000 (UTC-5), his local time. *************************** Subject: Re: A Precise Statemen

Re: 100 rare brain cancer cases linked to Albert Einstein. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 14 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

"If I had foreseen Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I would have torn up my formula in 1905." - Albert Einstein p. 112 - Einstein and the Poet (1983) The Starmaker wrote:

Re: it's about Dono (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

So, next time Dono post his one-liners sayings....it's just his ...'gutter religion' that's talking. His people are just a bunch of religious gangsters. I've got all the money I'll ever need, if I die by four o'clock. -Dono

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

No. You need to distinguish numbers, vectors and points. A point in space is a physical object, while a number is a mathematical construct and means a scalar. A vector is technically an ordered list of of scalars, which belongs to a

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: patdolan

WHAT!!!! Are you saying Bodkin is alive and well? First let me express my heartfelt happiness if he is indeed in good health. Second, are you implying Richard that you have some sort of technological method that has finally tracked Bodk

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

You are projecting again, Richard...

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: patdolan

I now find that rotchm and Stan have convinced me that v = v'. But this bodes even worse for the mathematical consistency of the LTs. Because if it is true that v = v' then the LTs can be made to produce utter gibberish on that assumpti

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Bodkin is reading all of this using a browser and googlegroups. He can't help it, due to his obsessive character. But he doesn't dare to come out of the closet by posting, because he would be tracked immediately, which terrifies him. It'

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 16 Hours ago by: patdolan

whodat are you Starmaker?

it's about Dono (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 17 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Of course Dono likes to use the word "cretin" because he is Jewish, and 'cretin' means...Christians. In fact, all of Dono's use of language is...the from old Jewish country.,,,or whatever you call all those old jewish guys. And Dono

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 17 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

You will find zero research papers that say this, Mitch... neutron stars are mostly neutrons... Do you know what a non sequitur is, Mitch?

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

There are lots of ways to waste time, and much more interesting toy makers. And there are plenty of failed scientists.

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

Conversely you belong to that faction of humans who relentlessly pursue perpetual motion as though that is an actual possibility.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

I'm going back to the original posting that you've deleted in an attempt to foist off a response that does not reply to the question raised. Perhaps you're used to arguing with others who give up easily. Here's the original posting and

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 18 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Neutronium is made of Neutrons and Neutron's are not theoretical. We have observed neutron stars made of Neutronium you nut... Then why do you need meds?

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 19 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

And it's OK that you feel in that way. Most mammals are happy belonging to the herd, like lemmings are. Having a herd mentality prevents you from thinking. You just follow the herd's rules. To be by your own need strong will, intellig

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

I'm happy with it, as are a vast majority of scientists. You are near the bottom of the list when it comes to folks I would trust with scientific thoughts...

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 19 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

What an arrogant ant. What distance means for you MUST BE applied to the entire universe! Because of the constancy of the speed of light, relativity and shit. And, of course, for you TIME is what your clock shows, as the retarded cret

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Bodkin's memory? I think that he finally understands that constantly replying to a troll is a big waste of time and has just quit on you. I can't say that I blame him, you are pretty much a waste of good air...

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

are g(v) & g(v') resp. Since the coefficients of the variable (x' here) must be the same, hence g(v) must equal g(v'). I.e.: g(v) = g(v'). Anything in that step you did not understand? Or, in (1) & (2), letting the variable t'=0, we get

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

It's grade school algebra to show that the first two equations imply x = g(v)[ x' + vt' ] t = g(v)[ t' + vx'/c^2 ] so your second two equations are true for arbitrary t and x if and only if g(v)=g(v') and vg(v)=v'g(v'), from which

Pat Dolan admits he;s an imbecile (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: Dono.

Re: Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

You still have ongoing discussions that are pending. Do not start new ones without terminating the other ones. We are waiting for your replies in your other post.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Very interesting Richard. Thank you. This makes me wonder about Dono and Dirk's first posts. Even my own.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

<off topic snipped> You still have ongoing discussions that are pending. Do not start new ones without terminating the other ones. We are waiting for your replies in your other post.

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

This is a post from his first day here. Priceless. Not so sure about relativity, being on his first steps. How cute. He evolved as the IKEA man (I Know Everything of Anything) with time, one book per week. Last time he posted, he was teac

Dolan's Critique of Pure Relativity

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: patdolan

It is now evident that many of the denizens of this forum are experiencing great difficulty grasping the complementary concepts of v and v' as applied to the Lorentz transforms. I refer to the fumbling, flummoxed and flounder rotchm and St

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: patdolan

Is this how you honor the memory of Bodkin, Paul Alsing? By bursting into his online wake and upending the tables of cold cuts and punch?

Re: Bodkin's first and last post in this forum? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Are you too ignorant to just do a search on your own?

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/-y0WiskHBJI

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_ADBlrIRsM

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutronium "Neutronium (sometimes shortened to neutrium, also referred to as neutrite) is a hypothetical substance composed purely of neutrons." Do you know the meaning of the word "hypothetical", Mitch?

Bodkin's first and last post in this forum?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 21 Hours ago by: patdolan

Can one of you Bodkondians come up with them? I would like to compare the two. Maybe also throw in a classic Bodkin post from say the middle of his career here.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I meant according to Lorentz mathematics, which I believe is just fiction, not a physical thing.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Are galaxies moving and where is their length contraction?

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 10 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Hawking is stupid. The matrix is science fiction. Einstein won the argument in QMs. Bohr's science is proven to be fiction.

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

You didn't read Sagan? He promoted Neutronium as well. You didn't win that argument. Neutron stars are also a fact. Why would anyone believe we are alone in the universe PNAL? Mitchell Raemsch

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 1 Hour ago by: carl eto

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PGWJYjLQsE

Re: 100 rare brain cancer cases linked to Albert Einstein. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

Ask the atomic bomb expert, Albert Einstein... it is more economical for Putin to drop a nuclear bomb on on Ukraine instead of wasting missiles, and bullets, and soldiers on Ukraine. One bomb will do it! Destroy everything! And you Save

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 1 Hour ago by: rotchm

are g(v) & g(v') resp. Since the coefficients of the variable (x' here) must be the same, hence g(v) must equal g(v'). I.e.: g(v) = g(v'). Anything in that step you did not understand? Or, in (1) & (2), letting the variable t'=0, we get

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, I pointed out that, given your first two equations, your second two equations are true for arbitrary x and t if and only if g(v)=g(v') and vg(v)=v'g(v'). It is false unless v'=+-v, in which case it is true, and the relation vg(v)=

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 1 Hour ago by: patdolan

Dear Stan/Townes, G. K. Chesterton once wrote that the madman has not lost his reason. The madman has lost everything BUT his reason. You point out that the LTs are true IFF g(v)=g(v') and this is exactly the point I am making in addit

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, the above explains that your beliefs are self-contradictory, because you claim that the sum of the first two square roots above equals the third square root, which is false unless the "accelerating path" is not accelerating. Therefor

ISS all night visibility coming up soon

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 2 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Starting end of this week the Sun will be almost in the perpendicular plane to the orbit of the ISS. (best on Sunday, May 15) The astronauts on the ISS will be seeing the sun 24/24 hours a day, and watchers on Earth will be able to see th

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That trivial derivation has been presented to you many times, in amny different forms. Again, it's grade school algebra to show that the first two equations imply x = g( v )[ x' + vt' ] t = g( v )[ t' + vx'/c^2 ] so your second two equa

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

Delusions, delusions

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 2 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

You are projecting, Richard...

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

No Dono. You only showed the last line of a proof you claim you wrote, but refuse to link to. I am 100 times the mathematician you are and I couldn't derive your last line. Scientific fraud.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 3 Hours ago by: Dono.

Only stubborn cretins like Pat Dolan get this imbecility. You have been shown multiple valid proofs that v'=v. I showed you two, lying piece of shit.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

correction: you get v' = vg(v)^2 Bottom line: v = v' is not warranted in SR because it is not proved to be true as is the case in Galilean relativity. Don't believe me? Then try to prove v = v' from these wellformed strings:

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

You didn't take your time to read anything from the links I've posted. And I was being moderate, as I only used two Zerohedge links. I've made some research on specialized sites about this nascent technology, and it's scary as hell. The

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Where have you shown that g(v) = g(v') ?? That is just as big a issue as the original challenge. Let's start all over rotchm with the initial demonstration for Galilean relativity, which is our model of a well formed transformation:

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 6 Hours ago by: Python

It's worse than that. You can't answer such a simple question. Well... You've already been, and these time more than ever. Moreover, it's disrespectful to post in French in an English speaking group (the other way also). If you want to

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

C'est clair que de croire que je ne sais pas que le temps mis pour faire un voyage, c'est l'heure d'arrivée moins l'heure du départ, c'est quand même être un peu fêlé du bocal. Son obstruction voulue systématique à tout ce

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Ah oui? Et qu'est ce que tu crois que je fais? Que je m'amuse avec des tomates et des navets? Tu deviens "ridiculous". R.H.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

tau2-tau1=Tr1 tau3-tau2=Tr2 tau3-tau1=Tr So we have : Tr=Tr1+Tr2 In effect. And also To=To1+To2 in the other trame. In the first trame (constant speed Vr): Tr=x/Vr To=Tr.sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) In the second frame (accelerated)

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Here is how a grown-up rational person approaches this. For any real-valued w, let L[w] denote the square matrix with components (by row) g, -wg, -wg, g, and let X, X' denote column vectors with components t,x and t',x' respectively.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

We agreed that I arrived at x = (x' +vt')g . Or by ur notation x = g(v)[x' + vt']. (1) You want us to show that your x = g( v' )[ x' + v't' ] (2) implies v = v'. The coeff of x' in (1) & (2) are g(v) & g(v') resp. Thus... 1-v²

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Python

Which clocks? Obviously the ones both travellers carried with them, identical clocks, setted at t=0 when the journey started at the place the journey started. Stop producing bullshit instead of answering simple questions.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Because (tau2-tau1) + (tau3-tau2) = (tau3-tau1), but if you add the right sides of the first two expression, it does not equal the right side of the third expression unless the three events e1,e2,e3 are co-linear, meaning the accelerating

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 8 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL. All what we see here is you wasting your time publishing nonsensical stuff.

Re: Real time, real simultaneity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Some believed, others didn't. Doesn't matter. Another example - for more than 100 years relativistic fanatics have been believing those nonsenses about the synchronization announced by their idiot guru; today, with the help of some

Re: Real time, real simultaneity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

This is just an example, a figurative. This is just to show that if the Greeks and Babylonians may have believed in the simultaneity of solar time, today the false belief has moved. 99.9999999% of humanity (and even Hawkins) believe th

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Quelles horloges? Je le répète, s'il s'agit de comparer les horloges du voyageur de l'espace qui évolue à vitesse constante Vr (ou Vo si tu veux) et celles du voyageur de Tau Ceti en mouvement accéléré, les deux temps propres,

Re: Real time, real simultaneity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

None of the ones I've mentioned is "solar time", however.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And while brainwashed morons are resolving their gedanken scenarios, real clocks of real GPS give YES.

Re: Real time, real simultaneity (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Lorsqu'on utilisait l'heure solaire, on s'est progressivement rendu compte, par exemple que l'heure de Jérusalem n'était pas celle de Rome. Tout le monde voit bien aujourd'hui, lors d'une diffusion en direct d'Argentine, qu'il fait

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Python

The question is simple : will clocks display the same elapsed time. The answer can be YES or NO.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Yes, you are right, we must limit ourselves to very specific facts. But what do you think I'm doing when I talk about Tr and To? I'm talking about taking departure and arrival clocks into account. And not Santa Claus. Tr is the time d

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

In the example you give, we're using three repositories, and we can't add things to others without a clear idea of ​​what we're doing. You have to limit yourself to what I said. I said that during a transfer from A to B, whether i

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 10 Hours ago by: Python

Keep your head in the sand, the FACT is that your claim leads to a direct contradiction. You have snipped the scenario I posted, hence did not answer my question. You guess I'm right and you wrong, right? There is no consideration about

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

No, it's not the same thing. In the case of "Langevin", three standards must be used. Only two in the case of "Tau Ceti". If I have time, I'll make you a little diagram so that you understand that it's not the same thing. In the case

Real time, real simultaneity

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

UTC, GPS, TAI, zone times Two events are simultaneous when its TAI/GPS/UTC time coordinate is equal. That's how things are in the world we inhabit. Your bunch of idiots can scream "NOOOOOOOOO!!!!" as much as you want, nothing is going to

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 12 Hours ago by: Mikko

Where is the word "space" used in a way that may cause problems? ... No. The x-coordinate of the "zero spot of K" is 0, so no need to call it x_0. If you do anyway, x_0 = 0. Likewise, the xi-coordinate of the "zero spot of k" is 0,

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 13 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan/Townes, you've had your chance. When you claimed that the axioms where contradictory and yet you still could not extract the sought-for theorem ( v = v' ) you exposed your self as a phoolish, phraudulent, phony who knows not the fi

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 13 Hours ago by: patdolan

Huh Tom Roberts?? Okay, do it. Combine them and show this forum exactly how v = v'. [ Hint: you won't of course, you big talker ]

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Faggot. Meanwhile, more news: Watch: "Terrifying" Chinese Super Drones That Can "Hunt Humans In Packs" Are Here https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/watch-terrifying-chinese-super-drones-can-hunt-humans-packs-are-here NEXT STEP: A fucki

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 14 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

It's necessary to combine with _both_, because in general for x,t timelike- separated from the origin there is obviously another "v" that matches the time component and that gives the negative of the space component. Likewise for x,t

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Excerpts from Schwarzschild's paper, answering to Einstein and developing his famous metric (to be corrected by Hilbert in 1917) On the Gravitational Field of a Mass Point according to Einstein’s Theory † by K. Schwarzschild (Co

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

My main critique of Einstein's text is about the use of the term 'space' in it. 'Space' denotes very different things. In real word cosmology, we use the term 'space' as name of what is outside of our own realm on Earth. But such a

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Neither you have it. You only abandoned 2000-years old math because your idiot guru was waving his arms very impressively.

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your idiotic religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 16 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

[FYI: this is algebra, not arithmetic. This algebra is independent of the geometric interpretation of these as coordinate transforms between inertial coordinates on a flat (1,1)-D manifold.] Those are not well-formed u

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 16 Hours ago by: whodat

It looks like you don't have and answer, or perhaps you don't want to answer. No problem. No partial credit.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 17 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

It isn't necessary to express things in matrix notation... if you prefer to just say "the first two equations" and type them out each time, you are certainly free to do so. And the second pair of equations is either redundant to the fi

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 17 Hours ago by: patdolan

And please use a 15 lbs heavier curling dumbbell.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 17 Hours ago by: patdolan

Yes, yes rotchm. By all means go ahead. I'm out the door for a few hours. There's a bar in Ballard I've been barred from for over a year because I didn't vax. Tonight marks my long awaited return. I'll look at your stuff in the m

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 17 Hours ago by: patdolan

S[Townes]an, you pathetic chump. You keep reverting to that matrix slop. Yet, you have so little knowledge of logical principles that you can maintain with at straight face that the reason the deduction can't be performed is because the

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

No answer? No answer? So you don't want me to show you how it's done? Make up your mind! If you want us to answer your questions, you got to answer some of ours too. Well DuH! You are really retarded aren't you!?

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The first two equations, in matrix form, are X' = LX, and the second two are X = L'X', so we have X = L'(LX) = (L'L)X, so L'L=I, so L' = L^-1. Hence v' = v. If you still need more help understanding this, just ask.

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Then you can't claim accuracy jany...

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: Dono.

I am not indulging your laziness combined with your stupidity. Eat shit, Pattucakes.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

Absolutely ridiculous. Show the algebra.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

I'm interested St[ownes]an. Show the contradiction.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

You just algebraically manipulated the LTs to solve for x and t. That's a triviality. We are typing past each other again. I'm done with you for now rotchm. Let's see what St[ownes]an comes up with. Kayaking....huh...that's for women

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 18 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That set of strings is well-formed only if v'=v. If v' does not equal v, the first two strings contradict the second two. If you still don't understand this, by all means ask for further clarification.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: Dono.

After elementary algebra, the 4 equations boil down to: (v-v')*(t'^2-x'^2/c^2)=0 with the only reasonable conclusion v'=v Eat shit, Pattycakes

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

You can't do that part on your own? Do you really need me to show you how to do that last step? Nope. Another lie on your part. I just got home (from a day on the lake, kayaking...). Took me a few mins to type it in. I know you're jea

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: Dono.

Chump is your mother's son, piece of shit.

Re: Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Then link to it, chump.

Crank Pat Dolan keeps on trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: Dono.

I did exactly that a few weeks ago, piece of shit. You couldn't follow the simple algebra.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Do you not understand that you are assuming in your derivation the there is only v and no other possibility of another, different velocity in as measured in another frame? This is the issue under debate. You utterly incapable fellow, ro

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

First of all Stan, are you actually Townes Olson? Or is Townes Olson actually Stan? Second, your response is sophomoric and does not warrant a reply while we await rotchm's derivation of v = v'. I will reply/educate you later. But for

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Where is v = v' ??????????????? You spend all afternoon and early evening trying to prove v = v'. You fail. Then you post to tell me what it is I "really" want to prove. What a light weight. Can you even skate backwards?

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

You are either trolling or a retard. And if you are trolling that you are a retard. A conclusion is you are a retard. x' = (x - vt )g t' = (t - vx/c²)g Expanding gives x' = xg - v(tg) [1] t' = (tg) - vxg/c² [2] Isolating tg i

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

No, you stipulated that the two systems of coordinates, t,x and t',x', are related by a Lorentz transformation, which signifies local Lorentz invariance and all of special relativity. There's no ambiguity about this, once you have specif

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 21 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan, I stopped reading your post after the above sentence. The physics to be settled is exactly what you are taking for granted; namely, that the Lorentz Transforms accurately reflect the physics. What is being questioned is that, in a

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 22 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The above is the simple answer to _your_ question. You stipulate two systems of inertial coordinates, S and S', which consist of t,x and t',x' respectively, and you have stipulated that they are related by a Lorentz transformation. That

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 22 Hours ago by: Python

Exactly not the same, because constant acceleration is assumed instead of instaneous change of motion (which is unrealistic by the way), but it doesn't matter. I don't worry. You know knothing, this a fantasy of yours forged by year of

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 23 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Evidence for your claim, Mitch, you need evidence...

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 11 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

It's not too difficult to understand! Suppose that the following expression represent the output of an OCXO (Oven Controlled Crystal Oscilator): S(t) = A sin Φ(t), where Φ(t) = ω₀ t + n(t) , where n(t) is PHASE NOISE. ω(t) = dΦ

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days ago by: RichD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp_EhjlLGkQAC -- Rich

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

All clocks drift. The question is by how much. And yes, there is a point here. Since absolute time doesn't exist we can only see the relative drift between clocks. We cannot exclude that there is a common and equal drift of all atomic

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 1 Hour ago by: patdolan

Stan, yes, there is something that I don't understand: why are you trying to cast MY problem in terms of another problem of your own creation? Why don't you work out a solution to MY problem first. Then show us how the solution to YOUR p

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

If there's something about the simple explanation you don't understand, feel free to ask for clarification.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Pro Tip: strip away any prior meaning that you may have endowed the equations with. Treat the equations as pure schema; then derivate with the conclusion as your goal. Tom Roberts, can you do this?

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Not even wrong, Stan.

Re: Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Here are the assumptions for this proof: x' = g( v )[ x - vt ] t' = g( v )[ t - vx/c^2 ] x = g( v' )[ x' + v't' ] t = g( v' )[ t' + v'x'/c^2 ] Here is the conclusion that is being asked for: v' = v Go. No one will ever arrive at the

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Because (tau2-tau1)+(tau3-tau2)=(tau3-tau1), and yet if you add the right sides of the first two expression, it does not equal the right side of the third expression unless the three events e1,e2,e3 are co-linear, meaning the accelerating

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Right, that's what I said. In matrix notation, L is the Lorentz transformation with parameter v, and L' is the Lorentz transformation with parameter v', and you are assuming the linear relationships X'=LX and X=L'X', from which it follo

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Its a fact PNAL...

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

If it drifts like you say it can't have obtainable accuracy Jan. Mitchell Raemsch

Lying piece of shit Pat Dolan cannot follow simple algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

I already did, in another thread, lying piece of shit. You were unable to follow the simple algebra, this is why you are here, trolling again.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Speaking of math, it's always good to remind that your bunch of fanatics had to announce its oldest part false, as it didn't want to support the madness of your idiot guru.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

If you are in the mood! Now it is YOU who is the liar. You can't do it. rotchm, you little wimp, I would have put your environmental candy ass right through the plexiglass.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 3 Hours ago by: rotchm

Yes it does. This shows that ur nil at math&algebra.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 3 Hours ago by: rotchm

A lie. It is trivial to show. And others have shown it to you. So you fail at math, and you lie. Now I know u r a dishonest crank. could have ever completed the proof It has already been shown to you. If I'm in the mood, perhaps l

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 3 Hours ago by: patdolan

Wrong, rotchm. WRONG! Your method for the Galilean v does not work for the Lorentz v. It does not work in the case of x = (x'+vt')g because t is not interchangeable with t' in the LTs. The calculation of t' involves the term xv/c^2.

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

You can calculate the average number of cesium atoms used to phase-lock the OCXO at 10.0000 Mhz. The excited atoms that shed photons at the photodetector (around 10 Ghz) produce a low frequency signal of about 0.1 microamperes at the outp

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Tr1=sqrt(To1²-x²/c²) Yes. Tr2=sqrt(To2²-(x2²/c²) Tr3=sqrt(To3²-(x3²/c²) Why? R.H.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

On the debut of GR, with Einstein's Nov.18, 1915 paper (Mercury's problem), Einstein didn't use spacetime because he resigned to use time. So, the entire paper (study it carefully) is based on the premise that t'=t and that GR equations f

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

Stan, we are doing logic here to confirm the consistency of the LTs. We are using the method of proof by contradiction. We postulate two velocities, v and v', and assume they are not equal. Then we attempt to prove otherwise. You can s

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It's not the same scenario. Do you really think that the Langevin traveler's problem (which I know better than you, don't worry) is the same as the Tau Ceti traveler's problem? On the one hand constant speed travel, on the other unifor

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 5 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

This is just plain false. A flat spacetime is still a spacetime, so NOT Newtonian. PointedEars

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Your two assumptions are self-contradictory unless v=v'. In matrix notation you are assuming the linear relationships X'=LX and X=L'X', and denying that L' = L^-1.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Again, the contradiction is that for any three events e1,e2,e3 on a constantly accelerating path, where the accelerating clock reads the proper time values tau1,tau2,tau3, your claim is that tau2-tau1 = sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2/c^2] ta

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

That's the merest of child's play algebra. Starting with v and v', or not using v' and just algebra, are equivalent. The "same thing". In both cases, you are using the algebra to show that x = (x'+vt')g. Galilean case: x' = x - vt (1)

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 9 Hours ago by: Python

Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 10 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 10 Hours ago by: Python

Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 10 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Whether the proper time of an object that joins E1 to E2 is the same whether it is in uniform motion or in accelerated motion, I see no apparent problem. We have said, to be consistent, that in the observing reference frame (earth or

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 11 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Oui, mais justement, tant que tu n'auras pas compris que je ne suis pas un individu normal, tu n'auras rien compris du tout. Tu vivras con et tu mourras con. R.H.

Re: Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Yours is a common misunderstanding. Atomic clocks do not 'measure' atoms to get time. In reality an atomic clock is a stabilised quartz clock. It will also go ticking on without any atoms to measure, but it will drift in the long term.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 13 Hours ago by: JanPB

Stop fantasising. This is not a James Bond film. When I said "It's not an object of debate among the intended audience of the paper", I meant the mathematics and the physics content of the paper has only one interpretation. You are now

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 14 Hours ago by: patdolan

What you have proposed here is the merest of child's play algebra. We are operating way above that level now.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 14 Hours ago by: patdolan

No, rotchm. Just as in the Galilean case, we are going to assume that there is a v for frame S and another v' for frame S' that each observer O and O' must use when employing the LTs. Your mission is to prove that v = v' just as you did

Re: 100 rare brain cancer cases linked to Albert Einstein. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 15 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

One thing I forgot to mention also... in the letter at the beginning: "...leads me to expect that the element uran- ium may be turned into a new and important source of energy in the im- mediate future." https://hypertextbook.com/eworl

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Sure, the intended audience would never ever dare to criticise a single word of Einstein. But authors do not chose their audience. A coordinate system is an imaginary construct, which humans have invented to describe spatial relatio

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

We're mighty powerful!!!! Any of us can destroy any crank with a single world!!! And if we always run - it's only because we're merciful as well.

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

H.G.Wells and Oliver Heaviside knew something about this. Wells wrote a book thinking about what could happen, but he got all wrong. Oliver Heaviside warned about the danger impending on the movement around relativity by the einsteiniachs

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 17 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Elvis is alive.

Cretin Pat Dolan keeps trolling (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 17 Hours ago by: Dono.

Yes. I showed you how, some time ago. You are too imbecile to understand and you are trolling asking the same questions over again. You have no intent to learn, you cannot learn, you are a pathological imbecile. You were born this way

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 17 Hours ago by: JanPB

You don't understand the theory. A normal person in that situation would instinctively know this. -- Jan

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

Yes. To be clear, you are asking to show that from x' = (x-vt)g & t' = (t-xv/c²)g we can get x = (x'+vt')g ?

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

rotchm's conclusion: It has been demonstrated that the v used in the S frame is indeed identical to the v used in the S' frame of the Galilean Transforms. Question to rotchm: Can it be demonstrated with equal certainty that the v in the

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 18 Hours ago by: rotchm

On the contrary. It is you that does not see it from my (much higher) level. Let's discuss the picture of your right bicep instead. Indeed they are huge, but off topic. Wrong, and off topic. Try to focus...else you will err again

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

I agree to this correction.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

rotchm, we are talking past each other. You are too unsophisticated to understand the (meta) level at which I am operating. I would rather not waste anymore time on you in this regard. Let's discuss the picture of your right bicep inst

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

Du to your "nope", I went to see what he did (his steps). Good catch! Indeed, his implication v' = -v is wrong. As his "axiom", he should have implied v' = v.

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: patdolan

Huh? "Nope" That's all ya got, Stan? C'mon, Stan. Try, even a little bit. What's "Yup" in your opinion? Maybe you don't understand my substitution v' for v. Is that it? Is that what has stumped Stan?

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Nope.

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Contact, Mitch? Do you mean the movie? The fiction movie?

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: rotchm

Correct. Nope; You were redundant in your "proof". That is what I am saying. Your proof relied on x' = x - vt [1] becomes x = x' + vt [2] by the algebra. The "v" in there does not change since its a constant (by axiom). Its the same "

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Have you forgotten about contact PNAL?

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Does fusion and fission energy come from the whole atom? From all particles in the atom? Then does it radiate from all of them? New energy emitted from one particle replaces the borrowing from the whole atom.

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 19 Hours ago by: Paparios

It is funny to see all you ignorant trolls asking for the guys who usually destroy all your nonsensical arguments. This group has not been so quite in over 25 years and it is great.

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

I can't believe that Bodkin is really gone. What's your proof Starmaker? Androcles drafted a post-mortem message, to be posted by his executor. If Bodkin has really passed then I hope he also has a last will and testament for this fo

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

rotchm, keeping in mind that you are operating out of your depth, I will try to explain things to you. A healthy deductive system of thought--its axioms and rule of inference--should be internally consistent and should not lead to contra

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 20 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

A claim based on what evidence? Sylvia.

Re: Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 20 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Apparently, Richard has gone completely around the bend... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v?n36l_z3WY&ab_channel=LyricsforLife

Earth is being observed from outer space. Lost its place on the list.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Space aliens have been studying this ant farm for more than a century. They are trying to figure out the reasons by which a movement created by a fucking cretin and his partners in crime, around 1905, brought to an almost complete halt sin

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 21 Hours ago by: rotchm

So you are directly contradicting one of your axioms. Of course then it will be shown that the above assumption leads to a contradiction, DuH!

Re: How to Write a Transformation--Part One (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 21 Hours ago by: rotchm

You do not need to prove it since you have stated that the v's are the same already. It is axiomatic, DuH. For instance, in x' = x - vt, it is (implicitly) declared that "v" is a constant. So what's your use at elsewhere, it's still the s

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

L'arrogance est un vilain défaut partagé par beaucoup d'hommes : "l'autre est un gros con qui n'a rien compris". Je connais tout ça. R.H.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Non, non. Pas d'interférence avec la chimie. Les élasticités (et non les contractions) ne sont qu'apparentes comme un homme peut paraître plus petit s'il s'éloigne sur la plage. Mais à son niveau à lui, il faut toujours 1,75m.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 22 Hours ago by: JanPB

No. It's a part of a theory that has not been disproved experimentally. -- Jan

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 22 Hours ago by: JanPB

You simply don't understand it. -- Jan

Atomic clocks? How many Cs atoms are measured?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Why would you need more than one Cs atom and how can you magnify it and count billions in a second? Nothing about the atomic clock is real. Mitchell Raemsch

Re: Special Relativity: Recursive, Many-Worlds (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Many worlds? If our universe dies does the multiverse Pat? Mitchell Raemsch

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

That would contract atoms. But that would interfere with chemistry... That is why it does not exist.

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 23 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

That is the problem... there is no exact science. Look at the uncertainty principle of QM. If science is exact why is QM so uncertain? This is true about all science and its measurements. Mitchell Raemsch

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 12 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

God is dead.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I don't like the term length contraction. I prefer that of elasticity of the lengths. Contraction, this means that the object which has a size L will have a size L' depending on how the relativistic eye will apprehend it. We then be

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra and fellow crank Dick Hertz (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

<snip mouth frothing> Good signature, Dick. Describes you perfectly.

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

Yep, for you and Dick Hertz :-)

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Dono, I mean Adrian, you still are the laughing stock at Researchgate. And 10 years have passed. Try to publish something at Lithuania or at the romanian high school for electricity technicians, asshole. Or you can try to make a seco

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Wrong! It's a perfect equation.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

This is a brilliant observation, Mitch. Length contraction is easily tested by measuring the length of a laser pulse in vacuum vs. the length of the same pulse as it enters quartz crystal.

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

Your [7] is where your imbecility shows.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

There is no evidence in science for length contraction. It has never been measured.

Re: Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Show this forum where!

Cretin Pat Dolan fails basic algebra (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: Dono.

We now rewrite eqns 1 and 3 as Err, you are a cretin, Pattycakes. You are unable to do basic algebra. You and Dick Hertz are at the most entertaining point when you make a run at math. Both of you fail. Miserably.

Re: The Most Important Result of Relativity. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

What have you done with Bodkin, Starmaker? He's gone missing long enough to inform the authorities. This post of yours places YOU as the #1 suspect in his disappearance. You have already stated your motive. Now what can you tell us

How to Write a Transformation--Part One

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 2 Hours ago by: patdolan

Galilean Relativity is a text book example of a logically coherent piece of mathematics and physical science. Let's take a look at the Galilean Transformations x' = x - vt (1) t = t' (2) from which we derive x = x' + vt' (3) or x = x' +

The Most Important Result of Relativity.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Albert Einstein said that the most important result of the special theory of relativity is his atomic bomb. http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1946/1101460701_400.jpg The Odd Bodkin has 'steered' this newsgroup away from

Re: Supreme crank Richard Hertz sucks up to felolow crank Maciej Wozniak (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 3 Hours ago by: Dono.

<snip frothing at the mouth> Nice signature, Dick. Very appropriate.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: Supreme crank Richard Hertz sucks up to felolow crank Maciej Wozniak (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Dono the ignorant, physicist wannabe, but only an EE who designed graphic cards using germanium diodes and transistors. Your time has passed, imbecile. Not good at electronics nor at relativity. You are left only with hate and insults,

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Words coming from the obscure Python, it's crispy. Quel déconnard, ce Jean-Pierre. R.H.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 5 Hours ago by: Mikko

That by itself wouldn't be self-contradictory. In Galilean relativity the elapsed proper time between two events is independent of the path as long as no part of the path goes backwards in time. In order to get a contradiction more is ne

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 5 Hours ago by: Python

Richard "Hachel" Lengrand (M.D.) wrote:

Supreme crank Richard Hertz sucks up to felolow crank Maciej Wozniak (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 6 Hours ago by: Dono.

<snip idiocies posted multiple times before by uber crank Richard Hertz> Kooks unite!

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Is it a guarantee that we can integrate? R.H.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

And we have a winner: Maciej! Einstein NEVER used the space bending fantasy on his Nov. 18, 1915 paper, ignorants! He developed 70% of that paper using the known newtonian expression for calculations, as it was used for more than 100

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 6 Hours ago by: Mikko

You already did. There are at least two possible solutions: a. don't be arrogant b. don't consider it unfortunate but normal and expected Looks like you indeed think so. Nor am I. But if you don't like the result, you may want to d

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Besides, whatever is proper according to a relativistic idiot - sane people piss at that and (as anyone can check at GPS) keep making improper clocks measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 7 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That is logically self-contradictory, because it signifies that for a rocket with constant proper acceleration the elapsed proper time between any two events e1 and e2 along its path equals the elapsed proper time along a uniformly movi

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Speaking of math, it's always good to remind that your bunch of idiots had to announce its oldest, very important and successful part false - as it didn't want to support the Holy Postulates of your idiot guru.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 7 Hours ago by: rotchm

It is well known in math that Δ is not the same as dx or del_x. It is well known that you can't replace "adding small linear" terms by integrating; One needs extra conditions for that procedure to be valid [ specifying the topological st

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And, needless to say, he didn't create different solutions for differents observers depending on their latitude and alitude. Or did he?

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

:) Of course yes. Einstein himself was violating his idiotic rules and calculated it in Euclidean space he has theoretically banned; samely as his idiot minions are doing now.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 8 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Of course not. Einstein himself calculated the precession of Mercury as a relativistic correction to the Newtonian motion, Jan

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

There is no, poor halfbrain. While the whole "falsification" crap is just some crap - even the most mad of your gurus never pretended they have falsified Euclidean geometry. You only believe EG is not valid (let's say it straight -

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: whodat

Other han an appeal to authority (see fallacies) how would you know that's true? What's the test?

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

No one would think of multiplying the square root of six carrots by the combination of ten potatoes. I see that unfortunately a huge form of arrogance continues to prevail (even if those who practice like that may think they are doing

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Nothing can ever confuse a fanatic relativistic idiot, RH. Face it.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

"Relativistic" corrections announced wrong and forbidden by your insane religion, of course.

Re: [SR] Question (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: Mikko

No, it does not. I reveals an already existing confusion. There is only one correct result that that integration can give. Every other result is wrong. Then your knowledge is wrong. Mikko

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Of course. The answer is that it depends entirely on the accuracy to which you calculate things. With present-day accuracy of meters in the AU everything you calculate needs relativistic corrections, Jan

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Fine with me. I had already given up on you, Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Thanks for the kind words. But you are to kind perhaps. The point is not knowing a lot, it is understanding it, if only a little. But don't worry, I'll keep at least one jaundiced eye open, at least some of the time. (depending on who is

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 10 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

The ingenious Shit of our ingenious Giant Guru is just ingenious!!! And who's not believing - is a stupid crank!!! And an odious nazi kapo, and a drunken janitor licking toilets, etc, etc, etc.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 11 Hours ago by: JanPB

Again, this is not a student textbook. They are perfectly fine, some of them are very important. None of your objections are valid, ir's all just silly nonsense. -- Jan

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 11 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Newtonian _mechanics_ is predicting nothing here.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 12 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

There is no such distance. Instead, with increasing distance the difference between the predictions of general relativity and Newtonian mechanics become smaller and smaller, and eventually the point is reached where even the most sensi

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No it is not, and considering the set of valid in 1905 (external) definitions - it's just an inconsistent mumble of an insane maniac.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 13 Hours ago by: Mikko

Common well known convetions need not be respecified. Everything else is well specified in the article. Note the title of the article: "Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper". The first word "zur" means that this is not a complete presen

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane Shit GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to Newton's Universal Law of Gravitation? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 14 Hours ago by: Mikko

GR is valid at all distances. Mikko

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Read GR main premises about the compromise between Ricci-Civita-Grossman curved spacetime and Newton's euclidean space. It was clearly stated by Einstein in his two last 1915 papers, in particular the one about Mercury's problem. GR cur

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Well, how? If you're a follower of an insane cult, it's enough that an idiot guru has postulated; sane people prefer the postulates of basic mathematics created by sane Euclid, however. And, as the matter of fact, even idiots like you are

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: whodat

Give some consideration to the possibility that all of space is curved. How would you know? This isn't a premise from me, simply something to think about.

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Explain Pluto's orbital path, cretin. Is it that the concave roulette that symbolize your stupid spacetime is tilted AFTER Neptune?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

I have no problem with missing obvious parts, but the with the missing of necessary parts. What I would regard as necessary and what was missing in Einstein's case were: a title for the introduction a logical structure of the text wit

Re: Imbecile Dick Hertz is having wet dreams (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

You're having your wet dreams again. In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane Shit GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Time dilatiom vs clock error

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

When clocks desynchronize and we're correcting them - it's a "clock error". When clocks desynchronize, but we're finding it proper - it's "time dilation". There is no time dilation at GPS, sorry. Time is what clocks indicate, and GPS time (

Imbecile Dick Hertz is having wet dreams (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 16 Hours ago by: Dono.

You are having your wet dreams again, GR NEVER fails

Re: In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Even relativists are not stupid enough to support this curved space idiocy seriously. The models they really use are - good, old Euclidean geometry. Of course.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

In the Solar System, at which radius GR gives its place to Newton's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I wonder at which distance from the Sun GR curving space fail and Newton's Law take over. Can any relativist here answer such simple question? As I know, space bending due to massive celestial objects vanish with distance up to a point

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 19 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Let's get above this. The atomic clock and in lattice, or atomic clock lattice, is a tremendous opportunity in experiment. Then, at some point, "Relativity and QM _do_ agree". Perhaps frame it as the current crisis in physics, like t

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 20 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

It’s the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. PointedEars

[SR] Question

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 13 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I see that few people react to my posts, and I understand, of course, why. The question I am asking causes some confusion. I recall, for those who follow, my problem. I consider that the proper time of a uniformly accelerated rocket will

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days ago by: Stan Fultoni

(1) That makes no sense (even charitably assuming you mean Schwarzschild). Birkhoff's theorem assures that any spherically symmetrical solution (vacuum) is a part of the Schwarzschild solution, regardless of whether or not there is a b

Re: Upon Review (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And what is the nature external to, poor halfbrain?

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Nothing surprising, all of your bunch of idiots did.

Re: 100 rare brain cancer cases linked to Albert Einstein. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

As most of yous know by now... Albert Einstein was already building an atomic bomb at several universities: https://hypertextbook.com/eworld/einstein/#first "b) to speed up the experimental work,which is at present being car- ried on

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: JanPB

Again, this is not a student textbook. The obvious steps are omitted. -- Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: JanPB

The formula "x= xsi+ v*t" is incorrect. It describes nothing, it's like writing "2+2=5". No, you are not taking the actual text as meaningful, you are inventing stuff that's not there. You are throwing away what Einstein wrote and rep

Utter crank Richard Hertz trapped in a shithole (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: Dono.

I agree, is is designed to trap hard core cranks like you.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

You have completely failed to understand what this is all about, in the way of physics. Resorting to quarrel picking may be the way of sci.physics.relativity, but there is no point to it. I'll leave you to your own, Jan

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

Atoms, no. (one postulates/assumes) After all, atoms are identical particles, by Pauli. Atomic clocks, yes, of course they drift with respect to each other. (both randomly and systematically) That is why those in the know, at standards

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

ROTFL. YOU are the one who is deeply confused. Do look back, do think again, Jan

Re: Upon Review (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

Better general quality of postings supporting relativity? I can't see how that can be possible. This forum is a shithole, and always was. I see that you, Moroney and others are having a good time posting at sci.physics today. Moroney

Upon Review

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 2 Hours ago by: whodat

With the decision(s) made by AIOE to prevent their clients from posting to sci.physics we lost a few posters. With AIOE not being the sole provider, return could be possible for all those affected. But it seems to me that some of the former

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI4AnytejgQ

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 3 Hours ago by: carl eto

dfdfdfdf

Re: Does not ISS exist? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 3 Hours ago by: carl eto

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI4AnytejgQ

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

" In Poland, almost 57% of the population is in favor of sending peacekeeping troops to Ukraine. These are the results of an IBRiS survey commissioned by the newspaper Rzeczpospolita. Previously, President Andrzej Duda said that the border

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 6 Hours ago by: Dono.

<snip rubbis>

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 8 Hours ago by: Sylvia Else

What about the constant? Sylvia.

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 9 Hours ago by: Python

You cannot confirm (or deny btw) because you are completely illiterate in differential calculus Richard. A very simple gedankenexperiment implies that your formulas implies no change of age in the twin parador scheme. You can put your h

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And you're too dumb to notice that your opinion is not shared by sane people.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Sure, but the text should have specified the used variables. A missing part cannot be used as justification of something. Instead missing parts are always treated, as if the author meant the wrong thing. But we are generous in this cas

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

WHAT is incorrect? I take ONLY the actual text as meaningful, not any other unmentioned material. The text itself is, what I'm talking about. Therefore you cannot use any other material, which is not explicitly quoted within the tex

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Coprophilia (from Greek κόπρος, kópros 'excrement' and φιλία, philía 'liking, fondness'), also called scatophilia or scat (Greek: σκατά, skatá 'feces'), is the paraphilia involving sexual arousal and pleasure from fec

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 15 Hours ago by: Dono.

Oh, look, the piece of shit is talking to his mirror again. You can;t resist, can you?

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 15 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

I had just written, "a pulsar cannot be used as a timekeeper for local time." Do you know what the word "a" means, as in "a pulsar"? Singular, correct? Not an ensemble of pulsars? * It is clear that further debate with you will not b

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

So, nature is external to what? Stop fucking, poor stinker. As you're unable to answer some simple questions about some terms you're using you announce that the one who asked you is a psycho. That's all. Nothing, of course, unexpecte

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

As anyone can check at GPS, however, atomic clocks are only stable enough for their moronic games; not for the serious measurement of the real world. This obvious lie can also be tested at GPS.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

Agreeing that's true, sadly he's not alone, Usenet is crawling with them.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

Newton has discussed this. The scientists have been discussing and pondering this for the past two hundred years. If you followed, you would know what their conclusion was and why. And consider the following experiment: Compare many puls

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 20 Hours ago by: rotchm

SNIP Off topic. Spam reported.

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paparios

LOL

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Direct Energy weapons, Tesla kind, or High Energy X-rays solutions. Reagan was so right, pushing this agenda in the '80s. I prefer directed EMP devices. It will show electronics and AI what's worthing. I just read a comment: "I never th

Re: Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYywnZFPe6g Angel Has Fallen || Drones Attack Scene in HD

Relativity and GPS s**t are dead. Newton-Maxwell + AI redefine future

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Forget your concerns about privacy, safety and human rights. This is what newtonian+maxwellian physics and Artificial Intelligence is preparing to use against you in a couple of years. Warfare? Forget about it. Everything is obsolete righ

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 23 Hours ago by: RichD

If atomic clocks disagree with pulsars, after 50 years, is there any way to say "THIS is stabler than THAT"? Is it decidable? -- Rich

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 14 Days 23 Hours ago by: RichD

accuracy vs. resolution -- Rich

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

There are three kinds of people who post Internet on discussion groups. 1. Those who hopw to learn something from others. I consider myself of that kind. 2. Those who try to help others solve problems. 3. Those who what to try to in

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane Shit GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did. Only such an idiot can believe such a nonsensical lie.

Crank piece of shit Richard Hertz has a complete meltdown (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 1 Hour ago by: Dono.

It is easily available , the Brits creamed you. There is no "Malvinas", it is all Falklands, you took it up the ass Nice signature, fits you to a tee

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 1 Hour ago by: Stan Fultoni

Huh? Birkhoff's theorem assures that any spherically symmetrical solution (vacuum) is a part of the Schwarzschild solution, regardless of whether or not there is a black hole at the center. So, the applicability relies only on being

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 1 Hour ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

From measuring their velocity - then also there are accelerometers. The, "accelero-mometer": is that orbits are free under terms in the usual sense of being "classical", ..., "a solution of an orbit". I.e., besides "this must be their

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Cretin, where did you collect this fake data? 1) Britons beg to the french military to give the "kill switch" device, to disable Exocet. France conceded. None of them considered that we found and disable the "kill switch" receiver on

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 2 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

You don't know what you are talking about. Nothing empirical has been established to level 10^-25, (or anywhere near it) Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

also, the sig needs to be changed to.. -maker of fine Earths, Galaxies and Universes. but everybody knows the odd bodkin will come back in some form to get his ...fix, to shoot usenet up his arm, to smoke and snort some usenet group

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Let me guess, fucking Romanian ex-pat: Bored, missing Bodkin and trying to pick a fight. Go to write another crappy paper on relativity, to be published at Lithuania, asshole.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Yes I remember. My memory still goes that far. R.H.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 4 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

In the right domains and the sectors. Sure, relativity's established out to 25 orders of magnitude, like quantum physics. The Galilean's really strongly well held up, too!

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And people like you act out because they're trained to bark, spit and slander at the enemies of their insane ideology. They're too dumb for anything else, anyway. So, nature is external to what? Stop fucking, poor stinker. You simp

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 5 Hours ago by: Dono.

They didn't. Actually, they refused to sell to your nazi government. 1.Air launched - Crashed into the sea between HMS Sheffield and HMS Yarmouth. 2.Air launched - Hit HMS Sheffield. 3.Air launched - Hit Atlantic Conveyor.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 5 Hours ago by: Dono.

He's too far gone, he will never get well.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 5 Hours ago by: whodat

People like you act out because there's something seriously wrong with them, usually involving depression and insecurity. Since there is no actual advantage or advance to be gained by attempting to have any sort of discussion with you, th

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: Mikko

This opens one more trap because the structure of your notation is different from the structure of the represented concept. This trap is not a part of science. The standard notation is to use delta for things that can be summed and d a

Re: That's what I think. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Right, and your beliefs are self-contradictory, because on one hand you agree that a twin moving inertially from event A to event B ages more than a twin who follows an accelerating path, but on the other hand you deny this. So, you clai

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Birkhoff's theorem assures that any spherically symmetrical solution (vacuum) is a part of the Schwarzschild solution, regardless of whether there is a black hole at the center. Of course, there are many idealizations, such as non-rot

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: Dono.

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 7:15:47 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Who said they were? Yes, and so what? You need an ensemble of them. (as said all along) That is the other side of the coin. How can we know that atomic clocks do posses this kind of long term stability? You are assuming what needs to

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

So you got that wrong too. Can't you really get anything right? France refused to supply more Exocet missiles to Argentina while the war was on. They had to make do with the five of the things that they had bought before the war started.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

I dunno. One day, I thought that. R.H.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 7 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It is the same for distances and lengths. If a distance can contract, if a length can contract, then they can also expand. That's what I've been saying for years. The correct equation for distances (and lengths) is: D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo^²/c

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Yes, it is important, very much, and your assertion is idiotic.

That's what I think.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

In exact science itself, there are many small pitfalls. Example of a trap: it is good to integrate the sum of all small delta-Tr to make it Tr. We denote Tr=∫ΔTr (“my” notation) It is good to integrate the sum of all small delta

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

That's what I say. You are right. Wonderful response. R.H.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 10 Hours ago by: Mikko

The article does not specify whether variables have units. It is not important. But it does specify that it is a coordinate in k. How it relates to coordinates in K is not yet determined, so it cannot be used in expressions oc coordinate

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 11 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

(sigh) Pulsars are not local to the Earth. You cannot use the signals of a distant millisecond pulsar to drive a clock yielding local time. You cannot use the signals of two distant pulsars to drive a clock yielding local time. You

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 13 Hours ago by: Athel Cornish-Bowden

Please don't go! Amusing though it may be to read the torrent of nonsense that the various crackpots spew out, it's nice to have the voice of reason as well, especially from someone who knows a lot of physics.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 13 Hours ago by: JanPB

No, this is also incorrect. You are running in circles. It's all incorrect. Your entire understanding of both the experimental setup and how the K-coordinates are used to track it is wrong. This equation is incorrect. Einstein has

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Priests should be honest and poor. Communists should be humble servants of working people... But they are not. Well, yes. There are many similiarities.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 14 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Great, you have found a typo. (in the umpteenth time I typed it) Do give an example of a (non-Newtonian) gravitational clock shift that is (accurately) measurable. (so with \Delta\Phi/c^2 not much smaller than one) It must be great

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

This is not exactly true, while close to what I think. Einstein wrote, that ALL considerations about time include considerations about synchronisation of clocks. But that is wrong, because our concept of time is based on our own loca

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Actually not. But scientist should understand what they do, because otherwise they would behave like druids from the stoneage. TH

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

He's, like you, a victim of the ideology making the scientists unfailiable demigods - to prevent undermining what they say. What is always easy, even if usually stupid.

Re: Music and field sync... (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Chris M. Thomasson

I am using my own C++ program to do this, it generates PovRay files and a MIDI file. The MIDI file is ready to go. In order to render the 3d scene, I need to make PovRay render each file generated by my program, it's really easy with a

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Same as always, composing an optimal (with no clear criteria of optimum) sequence of words.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

xsi is a variable, which contains a numerical value without a unit. This value is the numerical value of the xsi-coordinate of a point at rest in k. The same point has a x-coordinate in K, too. Now we like to perform a coordinate tran

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: whodat

So now you all are redefining "scientist" demanding they be competent in order to qualify under your definition, as though mistakes never happen. Dictionary wars, what's the point?

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Ok, you're right, because it should say x= xsi+ v*t, of course. No, because 'independent of time' means 'its equation had a constant value for time or no timer component at all'. But x= xsi+ v*t contains t, which is not a constant.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

The hope is the mother of the stupidity, Talking is a matter of neural networks, noone clearly understands how it works and noone ever will.

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Well, people HOPE, that AT LEAST scientists do understand, what they are talking about. Random idiots don't, but constantly talk, nevertheless. That's what make people sick in the long run. So they have a strong wish to be guided thro

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Who has told you such a nonsense?

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

But is not itself. And what is the function of "the external world in its entirely"? External to - what? They're too dumb for them, just like you. And, like you, they believe that speaking much, waving arms and spitting at oppone

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 16 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Which is prove-positive that you are far from being a scientist... If you do not understand then you have no business talking about it... and yet, here you are!

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 19 Hours ago by: Clutterfreak

Gotcha!.. Another nutcase. Hehe :) Jump inside my file and peep at my posts from now on, if you indeed haven't been doing it under some other alias :)

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 19 Hours ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

If time rate slows down it can speed back up.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Could someone please comment on Earnshaw's theorem? It appears to destroy the ionic bond.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 20 Hours ago by: patdolan

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 20 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Birkhoff's theorem assures that any spherically symmetrical solution (vacuum) is a part of the Schwarzschild solution, regardless of whether there is a black hole at the center. Of course, there are many idealizations, such as non-rotat

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

physics noun The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.. 1. The study of the natural or material world and phenomena; natural philosophy. 2. The science of matter and energy and of interactions between the

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

LOL. R.H.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 21 Hours ago by: whodat

Nature does include functioning. Try this: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nature "nature noun Definition of nature 1 : the external world in its entirety" There are additional entries as well, but functioning is not e

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 21 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

I don’t think you understood mine, and I think you have a few misconceptions about how Usenet works. Not true. At least that is not how it should be. Netiquette has been established in the first place to encourage proper conduct

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 15 Days 23 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

As I stated, you and I had, and continue to have, different "takes" on what was the issue under discussion. Your current response illustrates my point precisely. Your aggressive insistence that I was missing the point is matched by your

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Sure, sure, with a nice example above. Yes. Nature is NOT functioning. If you weren't too dumb for a simple dictionary maybe you could notice it yourself. As for The Shit - it's main topic is: coordinates (with time), clocks, observ

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 1 Hour ago by: whodat

You're so very astute! If you missed the point, this is a discussion group for participants to talk about science, not a forum devoted to the advancement of science which, if that had been the basis for establishing the group, could only

Re: [SR] Full of little traps (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

Certainly, and even more so to non-scientists trying to barge in. You have a lot of work to do, Jan

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

Not at all. I understand the whole situation from all viewpoints. Dono otoh is insisting that his extremely limited view is the only right way to talk abut it. Right. Right again. Scharwschildt's metric is an extreme idealisation. Th

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 6 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Unlike many cranks, you're indeed contributing to science here; I see.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 6 Hours ago by: Dono.

Which IS the exercise that Dick Hertz botched. So Jan is barking up the wrong tree: first he demanded that I used the full potential (including the Sun and all the planets in the solar system) and then, when realizing his mistake , dema

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 6 Hours ago by: Mikko

It takes only one single error in your annotations and all your annotations are proven to be not worth of attention. Wrong. There is no ksi in K. In K this point has the four-vector (x - vt, 0, 0, t) which can be written (x', 0, 0, t)

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 6 Hours ago by: whodat

Oh you're so cute with those antics! Are you sure you're not a girl posing as a boy with gender confusion as mentioned by another crank today?

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 9 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

You and Jan have different notions of what constitutes the "exercise at hand". 1) At the level of absolute precision with which Jan writes, the gravitational potential around the Earth is far from smoothly symmetrical. Rather,

[SR] Full of little traps

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 9 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It is always important for a scientist to clearly understand the things he is talking about. This is of course often the case; not all scientists are bandits, thugs, or hustlers. But it can happen that many, on certain points, and this

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 9 Hours ago by: Prokaryotic Capase H

I imagine that quite a number of the other regular non-crank posters are thinking in the same direction. Including some of the better/best ones.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 10 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Learn to read. *quadruple facepalm* PointedEars

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

A fanatic idiot will assert and wave his arms; it's very easy.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 12 Hours ago by: JanPB

In this case it's very easy to prove. The paper describes a certain whole and all its moving parts can be easily checked. Sure, but in this case is a fantasy. It was explained to you many times that your reasoning is incorrect. So I w

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

You're trying for some years with no success. No, it's not.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Impossiblity is very difficult to prove, but very easy to disprove. It takes only one single error, which you are unable to reject and your hypothesis is proven to be wrong. I take this quote of Einstein from page 6: "...a point at r

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Hey, stupid Mike, did you decide we're deserving you, after all? A mistake, again. We surely don't, you should go show your incredible wisdom elsewhere.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 14 Hours ago by: Mike Moroney

I'm not the one with a severe, hate-filled case of OCD, Dick. "Wasted here for nothing"? How is my entertainment 'man-years of time' 'wasted for nothing'? Or rather, if I decide against further entertainment, all the previous enterta

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 15 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

No, in the usenet community men to protect themselves from others attacking them use a woman's name for their handle in order to tone down the attacks.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Poor idiot was mumbling inconsistently with basic definitions, but a blind fanatic worshipper can never see.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Then you can't read. Thanks for expressing yourself so clearly, but nothing surprising from a relativistic idiot. You asked me to do something, I refused. That's all.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 15 Hours ago by: JanPB

Einsteins' 1905 relativity papers has no errors. This is merely a list of your misunderstandings of Einstein's paper. There are no errors in that paper. That's simply because you don't react to facts like a normal person would. Th

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Wait a minute! Are you trying to tell me that Bodkin is a man? Really? I'm shocked, I tell you!

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 16 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

the odd bodkin is probably now trying to figure out his next options: take a vacation and come back as a woman...or change his handle from the odd bodkin to I'M FUCKING GOD!!!

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Moroney, you're fatally broken, man. Think about the man-years that you wasted here for nothing. And still you think that we are "unworthy" to read your crappy posts? You have no salvation.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 17 Hours ago by: Mike Moroney

I've had an Eternal September acct unused for years. I *could* have come right back almost immediately with it, but... 1) I coincidentally got rather sick and playing with Usenet cranks on s.p.r. was suddenly quite low on my priorities,

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 18 Hours ago by: whodat

Than all you have is Waaaaah Waaaaah Waaaaah. Thanks for expressing yourself so clearly.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 18 Hours ago by: Clutterfreak

I don't think you understood my point. 2nd (and last) try. Usenet generally works only with effective kill-filing. It is neither the provider's nor your business to ban or complain about some nutcase who happens to post to your forum.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 19 Hours ago by: whodat

Are you, or is anyone else, certain why AIOE did what they did? Have they told you why? Or is everyone making assumptions about their reasoning.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 22 Hours ago by: Jim Pennino

Usenet providers have nothing to do with kill files, that is a function of a news reader. Yet again. And yet again. Looks like how usenet works is yet another thing the poster knows little about.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 16 Days 22 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

It is either that or utter incompetence. Because, following the latest massive off-topic tirades and fake news from the ’nym-shifting troll in ..relativity, I had sent them a detailed abuse complaint about *that* user of theirs. An

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days ago by: Dono.

I am talking about the paper referenced in this thread. Two clocks, at the same location , difference of altitude 1 cm. You are a very sore loser, everything to prove that you are not wrong. Typical of old farts have beens.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

Excercise, now discuss the French clock in van experiment in their tunnel under the Alps. Or predict how the relative clock rate on the German coast will change when some cubic kilometers of Greenland ice caps melt. Your mistake is that

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days ago by: Dono.

Look up the start of the thread. It is nothing but a rehash of the Pound Rebka experiment with a radius differential of about 1cm (meaning that all the other effects you cited are nulled out). Which is handled perfectly well by the red

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

You were talking. No doubt, for one particular tower, and idealising the Earth very much. Try handling the real Earth with it, with all the complications of the geoid shape, and with Poisson's equation for the potential, Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 2 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Yes, of course. Wikipedia is not a medium for publishing original research. (even if it is not nonsense, like yours) Jan

Re: Crank Dick Hertz eats shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No, RH didn't write it. Poor idiot Dono is impudently lying, as expected from relativistic scum.

Crank Dick Hertz eats shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Dono.

Absolutely

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I know what chileans think about french people, so you are screwed 50% (actually 66.666667%). Watch your back with your wife. I wouldn't be so confident on her, by 2/3. You do know that in a day like today 40 years ago, french people a

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: RichD

Dammit, it's a trick question. Which you saw through (correctly). I'm going to have to work harder - -- Rich

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

As years pass by, and topics for research are being depleted, fucking relativists are cornered into a situation similar to that which existed at the end of XIX century, when Lord Kelvin stated that the edifice of physics was complete, and

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

See, poor stinker: I'm one of the best logicians the humanity ever had and you're just a poor religious maniac of the third sort. Of course - you can't discuss against me, all you can do is barking, spitting, slandering... but you will do

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: whodat

Let me know when you've contributed something (anything) worthwhile. Goodbye.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Dono.

If you keep cleaning the latrines with your mouth, your brain will fall off

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

But in the meantime in the real world, forbidden nby your insane Shit TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Your mind is polluted with some common sense prejudices, poor halfbrain; if you were truly devoted to the ingenious idea of your idiot guru - you would want nothing but this magnificient symmetry of his desynchronizing clocks. That

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

we are talking the experiment done on Earth by the Japanese engineers. The reduced Schwartzscild solution more than covers the explanation of the result.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

But you do want to navigte probes through the solar system, to a few meters accuracy. I don't think you can handle that without going to the Newtonian limit, and applying relativistic corrections. How for example are you going to handle

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: patdolan

I contributed, Starmaker. On Wikipedia. My derivation of an entirely new quantity: the Lorentz contraction velocity--never before seen in all of science. And what did I get for my efforts? Dirty Dirk and Python cancelled my wiki contr

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Athel Cornish-Bowden

My wife is (Chilean + British + French) x 100 = 300, and you know what Chileans think about Argentinians.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

I've been watching for the longest time for some (any) contribution advancing science from you. All I've seen so far is: Waaaaah Waaaaah Waaaaah See, poor halfbrain? It's easy, anyone can write something alike. You're simply unable for

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Both are reversible. When you change the reference frame, the lengths and distances change. The length of a rocket varies, and the earth-moon distance varies. It's easy to understand. This metric effect is reciprocal (concept of covar

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Ignorance? Lack of understanding? Relativity? You mean, probably, that I reject the fucking cult behind a pile of twisted mathurbation, so I didn't convert to such religion. You, instead, were indoctrinated since youth. And as you ha

Kookfight at the OK Corrall (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

Kookfight

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: whodat

I've been watching for the longest time for some (any) contribution advancing science from you. All I've seen so far is: Waaaaah Waaaaah Waaaaah

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Dono.

No,no,no, we would be deprived of the daily entertainment from the village idiot and odious kapo named Richard Hertz.

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video. (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 4 Hours ago by: Athel Cornish-Bowden

[ … ] If you're no longer interested in displaying your ignorance and lack of understanding of relativity why not go to a group that specializes in political scaremongering? No one will mind if you go away and don't come back.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

You know that the GENESIS of relativity happened when FitzGerald (the scottish maxwellian) proposed that the failure of MMX could be explained by a LENGTH CONTRACTION in the order of (v/c) squared in the direction of motion, don't you? PH

Re: Has Anybody Here Wondered Why? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 6 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Of course it requires being all mathematical, ..., in terms of "this unified physics has a mathematics".

Crank Thomas Heger keeps on lying (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 7 Hours ago by: Dono.

Of course not, this is what makes you a crackpot.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 7 Hours ago by: Dono.

On Thursday, May 5, 2022 at 12:30:34 AM UTC-7, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Re: Utter cretin Dick Heratz keeps on eating shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 7 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No, RH didn't write it. Poor idiot Dono is impudently lying, as expected from relativistic scum.

Re: Utter cretin Dick Heratz keeps on eating shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 7 Hours ago by: Dono.

Yep, you sure are which is what makes you so entertaining , Dick. Every time you open your big mouth I get to fill it with shit. Now swallow.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 8 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

There is no material shrinkage. The equation says that the length light needed to travel to cover the material length of a moving meter stick is 1/gamma. There is no absolute time dilation. A clock second contain a different amount of a

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

None. So, do GPS (for instance) clocks measure time in such a way that local invariance holds? Or are they "somehow wrong", poor halfbrain?

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

What part of LOCAl don't you understand? Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 11 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Quoting: That's right; this is an a priori, this is just one of the consequences of your madness - GPS and other corrected clocks are wrong. W-R-O-N-G. "Somehow". Your idiot guru had indeed a really good reason to ban common sens

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Message-ID please? Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

That's of course, a pathetic lie, as expected from relativistic scum. You've written yourself, not so long ago, according to your religion and its Holiest Postulate corrected clocks are wrong, and that's the REAL approach of The Shit

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 13 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Yes, that's fine for the two body problem. For the whole solar system you really need the Newtonian approximation, and the potentials, (see MTW for a derivation) Jan

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 13 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Nothing to do with PTB in particular. Relativistic corrections have ben applied routinely in the calculation of TAI sice 1978. PTBnews_2018_3_e.pdf Correct. it is about 10^-16 per meter, so 10^-13 for a thousand meter. Measuremnet and

Re: Annotated version of SRT (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Am 04.05.2022 um 10:02 schrieb JanPB:

Re: Utter cretin Dick Heratz keeps on eating shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 14 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I wrote it ON PURPOSE, fucking senile dement! I don't give a shit about the formal Schwarzschild-Hilbert solution. I USE IT AS I WANT! Unless you, imbecile, are questioning the validity of: Newton: g₀ = G.Me/r₀² Are you ques

Utter cretin Dick Heratz keeps on eating shit (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 15 Hours ago by: Dono.

No, it's not, keep eating shit, Dick. There is no "g" in the Schwarzschild solution.

Re: Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 16 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

You're gay too? Well, the fact is Israel is the number one gay population people in the world. (including the israeli army, all a bunch of fags.) (they kill babies, don't they?)

Re: (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

On Wednesday, May 4, 2022 at 3:41:28 PM UTC-7, utter cretin Richard Hertz wrote: Listen Gono, I told you one thousand times that what your cretin pagan God wrote this in 1911, and is embedded (almost unaltered) on the Hilbert-Schwarzs

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

But the real contribution of your Shit to it is -- insisting it is wrong. It was you saying that any corrections against the Holiest Postulate and Lorentz's symmetry must be wrong, wasn't you?

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Stop fucking, poor trash. You're simply unable for anything but barking and insulting, just as expected from a relativistic idiot.

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 16 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Who do you think is the number one Lurker right now?

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 17 Hours ago by: Dono.

Clarification: You are 1 mi north of circle o close to the South Pole that the entire circle of latitude is exactly one mile around. Or half a mile around. Or 1/n of a mile around, with n integer.

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 17 Hours ago by: Dono.

You are on a line of latitude so close to the South Pole that the entire circle of latitude is exactly one mile around. Or Half a mile around. Or 1/n pf a mile around, with n integer. But there are no bears at the South pole :-)

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 17 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

Show your work...

Utter cretin Richard Hertz blames GR for his own imbecility (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 19 Hours ago by: Dono.

Dick, You need to stop blaming GR for your cretinism. This is not how the scientists used GR, "g" never comes into play. I will not tell tell you how it was done because keeping you basking in your imbecility is what make you so enter

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

If you "ignore the bear", there are infinitely many such points (1 + 1/2pi miles from the south pole).

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 22 Hours ago by: patdolan

Starmaker, can you please bottomline this for us? What are the implications, if any? I suggest this forum should rate the abusers--at least for posterity, so that future generations will know who were the worst actors and abusers at t

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

OK, another imbecile like Paul Andersen and his assertions that TAI should be corrected to the level of 10E-18 seconds, like the retarded at the PTB institute in Germany. They affirm that such corrections should be applied to every

Re: geometry puzzle (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 17 Days 22 Hours ago by: Dono.

White. North Pole.

geometry puzzle

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days ago by: RichD

Travel one mile south, one mile east, one mile north.   You return to your starting point. You see a bear.  What color is he? Show that there is no other point which satisfy these conditions (ignore the bear). This is on topic, becau

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

Or use Eternal September, which is free. (it has been up for a long time) Another possibility: buy some GB of non-expiring credit at some commercial usenet provider, for a few dollars. If you use it for text groups only you will never r

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

I really had no idea that you were that clueless. Relativistic clock corrections have been known and measured for over fifty years by now. Strontium lattice frequency standards demonstrate general relativistic frequency shifts for heig

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days ago by: whodat

I received several replies that I choose not to reply to directly. They all had the same thing to say-- Waaaaah Waaaaah Waaaaah Entertain yourselves folks, you don't know what you're talking about, and you all sound much like Gilber

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

Time dilation does change both ways. No it is not permanent. Enter lower gravity strength and time speeds back up. Slow down in space and time rate speeds back up. If rate can slow down it can speed back up... Mitchell Raemsch

Re: Why no length contraction? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 1 Hour ago by: mitchr...@gmail.com

falling into an event horizon length should contract to zero along one axis....

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 1 Hour ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Simply; clocks could be set "properly", according to the postulates of your idiot guru. There would be no one TAI, exactly as he prophesied... GPS and other time based systems wouldn't work, but what a magnificient symmetry we'd have inst

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Are you out of your mind? You have to be a very delusional person if you try to connect atomic clocks to ANY relativistic correction! Stop spreading lies and being deceptive, and download books and papers on the topic of atomic clocks

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 2 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Au contraire, -all- of physics depends on it. All precision measurement and standards setting depends on accurate timekeeping, and accurate timekeeping depends on having the relativistic corrections correct. And yes, people who work at

Re: Aioe.org (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 2 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

So it is still to hard for you to understand that there is only only TAI, and that it always agrees with itsef, (how could it be oterwise?) Jan

Re: Has Anybody Here Wondered Why? (thread)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 3 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

All cases of relativity - .... Wave/particle and wave/resonance and wave/image - parallel transport, it is a geometrodynamic rest - .... Geometrodynamics .... For "t" in Lagrangians ("parameterized by t, if not, 'in' t", Lagrangian)

Re: Has Anybody Here Wondered Why?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 4 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

Yes to all that, presuming that S and S' are pointlike observers at the origins of their respective INERTIAL coordinate systems. Only because you are working in 1+1 dimensions. In 3+1 dimensions the directions are not the same, except f

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 4 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

String theory is plenty strong: just another atomism after nuclear atomism. I.e. superstrings are about as many orders of magntiude smaller than "atoms" than atoms are us. For a continuum mechanics, nothing wrong with QED, QCD, ....

Re: Has Anybody Here Wondered Why?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 4 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

A coordinatesystem doesn;t have a worldline. What you were trying nto say is that the worldline of the spatial origin of S' is x=vt in terms of S, and the worldline of the spatial origin of S is x'=-vt' in terms of S', assuming their spa

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 4 Hours ago by: Al Coe

Your question was thoroughly answered, in detail up above. Again, in terms of inertial coordinate system S0, consider two thin superimposed circular disks of radius R in the xy plane with common fixed axis in the z direction, one station

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

How come it function as intended? A metaphysical fairy tail to be used as a pool of ideas for scify books and movies? Then it's correct. But regarding the intentions behind relativity, they were clearly used to break real physics and p

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 5 Hours ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

I should clarify. The laser knife is stationary. It is located in F0 at x=R, y=0, and z = 1. The laser knife is pointed in the -z direction. The rotating object is centered at x=0, y=0,z=0 and spins in the x-y plane. The object could

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did. And that's also the reason why your fellow stinkers scream about odious nazi kapo

Re: Has Anybody Here Wondered Why?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 5 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And in marxism-leninism communism is the best.

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 5 Hours ago by: whodat

Actually relativity needs no defense because it functions as intended and nobody has been able to replace it. Yes indeed, I get a good laugh now and again.

Has Anybody Here Wondered Why?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 6 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

In special relativity, even if v is very close to 1, if x=tv is the worldline of S' in the coordinate system of S, x'=-t'v is the worldline of S in the coordinate system of S'. However, the worldlines of light have the same form in both co

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 12 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is a Procrustean strategy. It's much more effective to simply ask questions and study. And writing "critiques" at that stage is a complete waste of your time. Whatever made you think so? Just ask questions on Internet forums, ther

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Because that's what your insane Shit has trained you for, poor halfbrain. :)))))

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 13 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Why defending? This group exists for amusement, Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 16 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

This is totally wrong! It is actually a method, which was meant as a learning tool. And this method works VERY good. You don't see its value, because you use an entirely different paradigm for education, as you are (apparently) a pro

Re: Adult Webcam Sites - Best Live Sex Cams

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 16 Hours ago by: Alisha Qore

Meet up for a blow and go – 28

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 16 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

It seems that you are the only idiot left from such "bunch", and you lack sense of humor, Miguelito.

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 21 Hours ago by: Paparios

Don't you worry, We are still a good bunch of guys who can read and laugh of all your nonsensical posting.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 22 Hours ago by: Python

He says, and he can prove that they are worthless (and WRONG). There is a pattern here. Everyone but you driving on the wrong side of the road? Really? You lost grasp on reality quite a long time ago Richard. You really are a pathologi

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I think that Bodkin is having a nervous breakdown by now. He can't fulfill his quota of 20-30 posts a day, since 2014. Also Moroney, Python and many others. Who's going to defend relativity, science and Einstein now? He will be forced to

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 18 Days 23 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It just shows that Vo and Vo' are invariant, and they equal the speed of light. Vo=x/To=c Vo'=x'/to'=c Digital Application: Vo=0.8c E=(12,9,0,15) E'=(40,9,0,-41) 12²+9²² 40²+9²A² (a²+b²)/To²=c² (a'²+b'²)/To'²=c² R.

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

I started designing and implementing a "usenet". The Big 8 text groups don't have a totally outrageous volume, about implementing "essentially well-defined resources what implement a usenet" (peer, portal). And web and mailbox interfa

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days ago by: J. J. Lodder

They can switch to another free usenet provider, Eternal September for example, Jan

Re: Absolute Motions

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 1 Hour ago by: Ken Seto

You don' understand what the article say.

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 1 Hour ago by: Clutterfreak

AIOE is not real usenet. It is like Google Groups; i.e., is essentially fraudulent as far as usenet is concerned. Any usenet provider that disables effective and easy kill-filing is a fraud designed to encourage spammers and psychos an

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 3 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

yous people are a little tooo close to the trees to see the forest... the chineese communist government are trying to rid of free speech by attacking free newservers posters. They want to bring down Usenet. Usenet is the last free spee

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 4 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Moroney is posting at sci.physics, which is not banned by Aioe.org. ********************************************* }, "Origin": "NNTP", "Server": "PHP N2J Gateway 0.94.r16", "FromMail": "moroney@world.std.spaamt

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

This is the last post from Moroney, dated last Friday. Then, since when Aioe is banning this group?. Moroney usually posts 4 or 5 times a day. Subject: Re: Odious kapo Dick Hertz licks nazi boots From: Michael Moroney Newsgroups: sci.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

No. YOU, you say that most of my answers are worthless. Don't worry, I've always been told that all my life and all over the place. This is called: ease. I know the cause, of course. Three terrible criteria that drag humanity into d

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I think that it's due to different posts with content related to what's happening in Eastern Europe. I didn't know that censorship was going to be so deep in the West. Aioe NNTP server is physically located at Germany. I deeply regret t

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 6 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

I have mailed abuse@aioe.org to tell them that blocking s.p.rel is a very bad idea, and asked them to reconsider. And I realy don't see what that abuse is supposed to be. I suggest others here do likewise. Jan

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 6 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Last post from Bodkin, almost 24 hours ago. Something happened to his posts. I assume the same for Moroney and others using Aioe. Subject: Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation From: Odd Bodkin Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Organ

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Learn to read, poor halfbrain, it's an useful ability. That's right. Thinkers wanting to find the reasons why communism was the best political system ever have got the results of similiar value.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

YOU introduced Popper, and YOU said he knew better, apparently without knowing what Popper really said, [1] Jan [1] For others: Popper wanted to find reasons why Einstein for example is a prime example of real science, and why Marxist

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

[-] Have you considered the possibility that the problem with you and your feelings might be with you and your misunderstandings? Like Euler, the greatest mathematician of all time, to name just one obvious example. Your problems, I'

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 11 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Too bad for the poor idiot. Thinkers more competent (Poincare, Kuhn, Lakatos) knew better; though, of course, they were unable to describe more than some minor details. It's a job for a team of information engineers, not for single amateu

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 12 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Popper certainly did, and Popper himself gave Einstein's light deflection prediction, and Eddigton's confirmation of it as an example of just the right way to proceed in science. It was what got him thinking about science to begin with.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Certainly; or rather he simply prepared a primitive excuse for the madness of E and his obeyers. Of course, only such primitive fools like you or Bod can believe that science can work such a primitive way.

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 14 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Well no, they are not banned, the newsgroup sci.physics.relativity is banned on newsserver Aioe.org they just have to scramble to find another newsserver.. I'm not aware of any free newsservers that carry sci.physics.relativity so that

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 14 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

Certainly. Popper lionised Einstein as -the- perfect example of how science should be done, Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

I think, that bad things follow from bad form. So formal correctness is actually a requirement in theoretical physics. There is actually no justification for avoiding formally correct methods. My personal experience was more like thi

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Einstein defined his variable names on the previous page 5: the coordinates in system K get small Latin letters as names and the coordinates in k had small Greek letters as names. However, Einstein did not say, how he wanted to use th

Re: Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Bodkin, Moroney and many others are banned then?

Aioe.org

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 15 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

for those who use free newsservers... if i'm not mistaken sci.physics.relativity is on the banlist now as of today. https://news.aioe.org/documentation/access-restrictions/ nntp.aioe.org: news.aioe.org:

Re: Where does Relativity come from????

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Get conscious, poor insane crank. If The Shit gave you correct predictions you wouldn't have to release "inflation", "dark matter" and other patches.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 17 Hours ago by: Paul Alsing

I think most people here agree that you have not studied relativity. It is not all that hard to determine, from your responses, which are mostly worthless...

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 18 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Are you sure? Not studied? Nothing realy wrong? Optimist, Pointedears. R.H.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 20 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

There is nothing wrong with the mathematics of special relativity; you just do not understand it. Probably because you have not even studied it yet. PointedEars

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 21 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Of course, there is...What happens if Putin instead?

Buy new Madlab Carts Vape Things To Know Before You Buy

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 21 Hours ago by: anderson...@gmail.co

How to identify pretend decision cart? It truly is quick becoming a different trend while in the cannabis business for copycats to arise once a cart gains standing. That may be no diverse with the selection carts, a lot of fakes are purchas

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 22 Hours ago by: RichD

A. Einstein, "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies," Annalen der Physik, Vol. 17 -- Rich

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 22 Hours ago by: RichD

Your question is mushy, but very interesting, if properly phrased. Einstein mentioned nothing about angular velocity transformation in the 1905 paper. Perhaps he thought it follows trivially from the linear velocity formula. It doesn

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 22 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

You cannot use Mathematics to drop an atomic bomb. You have to use experimental measurement when the math doesn't work.

Re: General Gravity Equation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 22 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

cy Faa is the observer measure the frequency cy of a local source such as a local sodium source. That's why Faa is a constant. Fab is the measured frequency of an identical moving source that's why it is variable with time.

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 19 Days 22 Hours ago by: RichD

? What is (R,0,1)? The knife cuts... in which direction? Does it spin with the disc? It isn't enough to write, one must also write clearly. -- Rich

Re: [SR] accelerated frames

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

If you would have been serious you would have written it in TeX, (istead of in ? ? ) Jan

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 1 Hour ago by: altt testt

-------------------- We'll start off again. 1)  Dinosaurs. alt.

Re: Where does Relativity come from????

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 1 Hour ago by: Dono.

The Richard Hertz imbecile confuses relativity with relativism, a classical mistake for natural imbeciles.

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

So, do you think Israel will be willing to give up all their nuclear weapons over to China in exchange for protection???? (if everyone also agrees to give up their weapons) No way, right? Look at what happened when Ukraine gave up all t

Re: Where does Relativity come from????

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 1 Hour ago by: J. J. Lodder

But it does give the correct spectra for light that is billions of years old, Jan

Re: A standard

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

It's not a problem, because sane people are ignoring your religion and synchronize them anyway.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Repeating this primitive bullshit won't make it true, and some thinkers more competent than poor idiot Popper knew better.

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 2 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Well, maybe it's nature's way of dropping an asteroid on the dinosaurs, and Nature's thinking is...'maybe i gotta start this thing again.' the only solution to prevent the complete annilation of human beings is to give all our weapons o

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 2 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Some examples of people thinking similarly: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/05/why-shouldnt-russia-threaten-us-carriers.html#more

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

I will answer about my concerns in the simplest possible way: 1) There is not such a thing as a regional thermonuclear war, confined to Europe. It will spread to continental USA, China, Israel and any country that may have nuclear w

Re: F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 4 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

What are you worried about, nobody is going to drop an atomic bomb on Argentina...

Re: A standard

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Hello, Maciej. That there are clock desynchronizations is not a problem. I think everyone agrees with that. In all the laboratories in the world, we test that. It is the same thing for the transformations of Lorentz, which are corre

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 5 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

I’m not sure what kind of rigor you think is being jettisoned. Hypotheses can be unusual or unexpected, but the conclusions that are drawn from them are developed from solid deductive reasoning. If those conclusions compare favorably

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 5 Hours ago by: Luke Kawazu

Wow really!! Such as, you want the russian federation military to leave, so you can invade the nazi "ukraine"?? And reboot the *_bio_weapons_labs_*?? Are we idiots??

Re: [SR] accelerated frames

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 5 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

According to you, if we send someone to 0.8c in space for 30 years, i.e. v$0000km/s, you do not agree that the traveler will not return until he is 18? R.H.

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 5 Hours ago by: Luke Kawazu

I hear, you guys in western europe are capitalists. I don't even know what it is. It must be the *_covid_passport_*, whereas the number of baths, the length of the baths, the number of calories bought from supermarkets, the fresh water

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 6 Hours ago by: Reinhardt Behm

You need to create a video and post it on Youtube. Thomas does not comprehend text nor formulas. He "educates" himself via YT.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 6 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

When you use mathematics to describe and predict physical phenomena, you identify units and observables that you attach to the mathematical models. But I don't think that in deriving results from those models one should jettison rigor a

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Fanatic idiots often see strange things, and even more often they lie they see strange things.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 8 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

A pity that GPS staff didn't understand that we're FORCED and make clocks measuring t'=t, like all serious clocks always did. Common sense was warning your idiot guru. Sure, GPS is evil. Don't you think it should be banned?

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 8 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

I see that it was incomprehensible to you as well. As long as you’re going to be wrong, you might as well be confidently wrong.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 9 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

No, they weren't. If the audience ever understood that what he was postulating was to abandon clock synchronization for the sake of some moronic symmetry - it would ROTFL.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 9 Hours ago by: J. J. Lodder

There is nothing to prove, it is an a-priori. Space-time has local Lorentz invariance by postulate. (Einstein 1905) This means that space and time must be measured in such a way that local Lorentz invariance holds. If you measure somethi

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 9 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

And when you chose to do that, your (hypothetical) professor focused on things that a real professor would not, especially since it was not a student submission but a professional paper. The statements you found to be incomprehensible w

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 9 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

Actually, you were questioning whether there is any need to synchronize clocks at different places. The question was not HOW synchronization should be done in SRT but WHETHER it should be done in SRT. Note that the synchronization te

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 10 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is mostly nonsense. Not all of it but most of it you just make up. Reality is unaffected by your fantasies. -- Jan

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 11 Hours ago by: JanPB

What I said is non-debatable. This is my last word on the subject. -- Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 11 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Thanks, Bod, oh poor fanatic idiot.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 12 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

Well done there, Woz, oh fabulous mind of all time.

A standard

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 12 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

An insane guru, waving his arms, has persuaded you that desynchronizing clocks should be a standard, because they have a nice symmetry. And you've bought it. Too bad for you.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 13 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And in the meantime in the real world, forbidden by your insane Shit TAI and GPS keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did; your imagined ants can do nothing about it.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 13 Hours ago by: JanPB

But this is a nonsensical enterprise. -- Jan

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 13 Hours ago by: JanPB

This is describing the K coordinates of an object at rest in k (moving at speed v wrt K). It's a formula relating the x and t coordinates of such object. x and t are K's coordinates. There is no "ksi" here. I had this form

Re: Where does Relativity come from????

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 13 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

Some people, say the physics made the fourth dimension, while, others say the fourth dimension, made physics. When you think of two alternatives and only one existing, it's convenient to imagine what were each - existing. The fourth

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 14 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The combination of those two things is not sufficient to serve as a starting point, because the Michelson experiment is merely evidence for the relativity principle, which doesn't distinguish between Galilean and Lorentzian relativity. R

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 14 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 14 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

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 comme

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 15 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Am 01.05.2022 um 14:19 schrieb Odd Bodkin:

F**c science. Nuclear war is on the verge of happening. Watch this video.

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 15 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Repeating this bullshit won't make it true, and the thinkers more competent than poor idiot Popper (Poincare, Kuhn, Lakatos) knew better.

Re: [SR] accelerated frames

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 15 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

While it seems irrefutable, sane people make clocks measuring t'=t, like always.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 15 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

Whether it makes sense to you is of no concern of mine. You have only to look at Robert Mills’ book yourself, and then at least your comments will be about what it is that he said. And if you find that his presentation is lacking in y

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 16 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Neither one. I've said quite clearly (see the posts above) that your representation of Mills' presentation makes no sense, and I explained in detail why.

Re: Geodesy

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 17 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

I think Fritz London represents for superconductivity, and the usual notion of the potential well, and singular analysis, what is to be read into Einstein, for Lorentz Larmor and so on, and Lorentz London, Fitzgerald, ways to approach

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 17 Hours ago by: patdolan

Bodkin, Citizen Jimenez has already publish much remarkable work in this forum. I am eager to study this latest production of his. But the argument for which posterity will remember Citizen Jimenez is the one he made a few months back c

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 17 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

It is not clear whether you are claiming that Mills’ presentation makes no sense, even without looking at his presentation; or whether you are claiming that my representation of his approach must surely be wrong, again without botherin

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 17 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

Congratulations for landing on the difference between mathematics and physics. In mathematics, one starts with a set of axiomatic statements and then deductively find conclusions that stem from them, without actual reference to any real

Re: Geodesy

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 18 Hours ago by: patdolan

Ross, you and Mitch should write as a team. You two would be the Rogers and Hammerstein of physics. Your styles will take some time to mesh, however. Mitch is more in the haiku vein. Whilst your style tends towards Joyce. I have been

Re: Geodesy

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 20 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

If you ask what it seems the, interpretation of the physics, for constants it seems is for "running constants: the constants that run up or down or out, or out", constants, are basically under the linear of course for where the const

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 20 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

You both don't understand what's really going on. That Jan call Putin "Putler" is absurd, because he's a neocon supported by Jews like WEF's Schwabb. He's almost a neojew, like Zelensky or Trump. They all are pro-Israel, as it could b

Re: Geodesy

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 20 Hours ago by: Ross A. Finlayson

How's that been?

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 21 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

That might be so, but would only be due to a lack of proper education. By clueless people perhaps. Nobody but you said that anyone should. But that would be an argument that could only be made by people as clueless as yourself. I

[SR] accelerated frames

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 21 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

It's probably very surprising to say, and I know I'm not going to make myself loved, neither by relativists nor by Newtonians, but I'm thinking terribly about this: "And if the equation ∫ΔTr=∫ΔTo.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) which seems irrefu

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 21 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

Your "feeling" is unfounded. Mathematical proof always proceeds from some axiomatic basis, and for special relativity the axiomatic basis has been provided to you, namely, the principle of relativity and (say) the light speed principle

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 22 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

Hmmmm. Those of us who demonstrate a clear understanding of modern physics are all familiar with mathematical proofs. But we are certainly not "most of the posters here". In physics, mathematical proofs only apply within the context of a

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 22 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

I am getting the feeling that the notion of rigorous mathematical proof is alien to most of the posters here. Well, Newton and Einstein have long been criticized for often being deficient in that area too. No contemporary mathematician

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

Oui, c'est très facile, mais bourré de petits pièges. Posons mes deux équations qui font tire tout le monde (surtout la première car pour la deuxième les physiciens ont la même que moi, et ils détestent rire d'eux mêmes) :

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 22 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

You can check for yourself. The principle of relativity is assumed. The result of the MMX is taken as true. A hypothesis of time dilation (or alternatively length contraction) is shown to be consistent with those results, which consistenc

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 23 Hours ago by: Dono.

1. Start with t'=\gamma(t-vx/c^2) 2. Make x=vt What did you get? Generalization for arbitrary direction of motion between frames. Look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_transformation#Vector_transformations

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 23 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

That's just reciprocity, which follows from the relativity principle and isotropy. Huh? No derivation of the Lorentz transformation (not "transform") assumes time dilation per se. To the contrary, time dilation is a derived consequen

Re: [SR]Relativistics versus "cranks".

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 23 Hours ago by: Jonas Tanaka

in gearmony they can put you in prison, just by denying the nazi war_crimes of ww2. But guess what, the corrupt government are sending military weaponry hardware to the nazi now, in "ukraine".

Re: General Gravity Equation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 23 Hours ago by: Jonas Tanaka

which time, and why not Faa? Who push the Fab and who push the Faa??

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 20 Days 23 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

There are lots of ways to go about this, but the point is that you have to start with some non-Newtonian fact (experimental observation) that is taken to be true, and then the principle of relativity provides the rest. Whether that experi

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days ago by: Jonas Tanaka

be not that sure. It appears that the war is already over (former cia). It was over two days after the russian federation inset. The military hardware from america is apparently resold in Africa. Big money for the bidans and the nazi

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

I should have added the assumption that in S' coordinates, the formula for the S world line is x'=-vt'. I have never seen a rigorous Lorentz transform derivation that didn't assume time dilation has already been established, the lineari

Re: General Gravity Equation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days ago by: Odd Bodkin

Ken, Where is John “NoEinstein” Armistead and his self-published book that made him “King of the Science Hill”? He’s dead, his book gone, unread, forgotten. Where is Ralph “Henry Wilson” and his “comprehensive” book

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 1 Hour ago by: Clutterfreak

What does the 1940s comic books say about it?

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

I understand it is a little differcult for yous to understand and see the center of the universe... Look at a woman.. Where is her Center? ..the focal point, also known at the...entertainment center? Where life comes from? The cen

Re: General Gravity Equation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 1 Hour ago by: Ken Seto

What experiments that are inconsistent with my theory????

Re: General Gravity Equation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 2 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

No Fab/Faa is not a constant over time.....for the simple reason that Fab is variant with time. This proved that you don't know what Covariant means. You just throw out words that you don't understand.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 2 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

Nonsense.

Re: Does not ISS exist?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 3 Hours ago by: carl eto

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=OaYEPVX3&id=A81927099E87DA12C35A8FB973F109A63E65FF99&thid=OIP.OaYEPVX31rr1iRA680vefQHaER&mediaurl=https%3a%2f%2f2.bp.blogspot.com%2f-WQnEA0POF4k%2fWP9T6LdQ-mI%2fAAAAAAABSbc%2fIA3NpmFSeG

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 3 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Stop this heresy, Bod, poor halfbrain. According to ther rules of your moronic newspeak GPS clocks are not synchronized.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 4 Hours ago by: Stan Fultoni

The fully general statement, not restricted to just the x,t coordinates along a single world, but applicable to the x,t coordinates for all events, is the Lorentz transformation, i.e., t'=(t-vx)g, x'=(x-vt)g where g=1/sqrt(1-v^2). Well

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 4 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

With only the added assumption that in both coordinate systems, there is a light cone at each event (t0,x0), (c*t - c*t0)^2 = (x - x0)^2 with the same equation holding with S' coordinates, I think there should be a rigorous mathematical

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 8 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

This, by the way, is exactly what is done with the GPS, on purpose and to good value. The GPS clocks are designed to synch with ground clocks, though in exchange they are desynchronized from local clocks. You say no one should want to do

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 8 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

This makes my point exactly. As I said, don’t confuse measuring time at one place — the one clock on earth — with measuring time in different places — synchronizing separated clocks. Two different things. Time is not just o

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 8 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

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

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 11 Hours ago by: Job Chikamatsu

btw, the nazi gay actor zelenske said nothing yet, about the invasion of the slavic nazi polakia. I believe the polaks and the americanis are debating now, on *what_the_khazar_gay_actor* is going to say.

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 11 Hours ago by: Job Chikamatsu

You talk about the russian federation, not "putin". It explains your failure undrestanding relativity, as a brainwashed mainstream bitch. But the russian army told polakia *already*, if the polakis *invade* "ukrainia", they are going

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 12 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

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

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

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 hav

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 13 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

No. I regard the surface of the Earth as 'one place' and the surface of a distant planet as another place. But we do not need to know the time shown at clocks at remote planets, if we want to construct a clock here on Earth. Therefor

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden by it "improper" and "non-standard" TAI and GPS keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

And it would be no more detached from the reality than it is now.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

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,

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 16 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

We'll see.

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 16 Hours ago by: Thomas 'PointedEars'

No. For the umpteenth time now: There can be no proof because it is a THEORY, NOT a theorem. So there can be, and is, "only" A LOT of observational evidence to support it. As for *your* better _understanding_: Draw the spacetime di

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 17 Hours ago by: rotchm

Using normalized units [c=1], reference frames S' and S, and caps for vectors, and X = A + Vt [if A <> 0 then their origins did not initially coincided; a general case. V is the velocity vector of S' wrt S]. Since you request that the

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 18 Hours ago by: JanPB

No, this is incorrect. It's possible, in fact, to state special relativity without ever defining clock synchronisation. Clock sync is NOT where it's at. -- Jan

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 18 Hours ago by: JanPB

[...] [...] Your OCD is getting worse. I'd check with a doctor. [...] This will never happen. Just like Newton's mechanics and Maxwell's electrodynamics, Einstein's relativity will stay, forever. Dream on. This will never happen. Ke

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 18 Hours ago by: JanPB

Well, it is: the paper does not contain any errors. 'Tis all true but also N/A for this discussion. Of course not. Why should they? Research papers are not high school textbooks. Of course I have a "right": I'm explaining something

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 19 Hours ago by: JanPB

First Putler needs to leave Ukraine. Then we'll talk. He royally messed up, now he has to face the consequences. This is non-debatable. -- Jan

Re: A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 20 Hours ago by: Odd Bodkin

See Mills, Space, Time and Quanta. He does a good job from the direction you’re going.

A Precise Statement of Time Dilation

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 20 Hours ago by: Ricardo Jimenez

Assume the standard configuration where (t,x) are the coordinates in the rest frame. Thus the origin's world line is x=0 in the rest frame. There is also an inertial moving frame with coordinates (t',x'). It shares a common origin (event

Re: (COLOR!) Albert Einstein in his office at Princeton University

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 20 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

you may stick your petrodollar directly into your ass. Installation of Angara A1.2 on the launchpad https://www.bitchute.com/video/i5BenrzM2omJ/

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the elect

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 21 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

He was thinking then of synchronization of clocks at the Train Stations. The clock einstein used then are known as coo-coo clocks. Cuckoo clocks made in Germany. If you want to recreate einstein's synchronization of clocks you first ne

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 21 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

it's new to you because I'm refering to...Before the big bang, whence they came from, not After the big bang.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 22 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Venous Python writing the name of a cretin plagiarist along with the name of Poincaré. But you can't expect decency from a deceiver, liar, envious relativist like Python. His nick tells it all.

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: Python

Cretin! The synchronization scheme presented in A.E. article is actually called the "Einstein-Poicaré synchronization convention" for a good reason : Einstein and Poicaré's ideas are 100% equivalent.

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

How do you get into the best colleges? Use the Solution, ...the backdoor. (you can even have a person take the test for you) solution, solutions, solutions. If there is no food in the refridgerator, get take out! solution, solutions, s

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

new to me. However, as EM you 2D integrate the amplitude over surface, which becomes weaker further away from the sources. However as photons, the probability amplitude *has_to* flattens and fall, further away from the source. I can't

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: The Starmaker

Stars, the origin of stars...whence they came from...the Stationary Points in Space, had no curvature in space then. The Big Dipper which existed at the big bang contains 4 stars at points perpendicular to each other. The other handl

Re: Absolute Motions

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

Ukraine is being used as a FOOL - South African politician truth bomb https://www.bitchute.com/video/BiPh52uQC0pj/ Training The Next Generations Of Ukrainian NAZIs https://www.bitchute.com/video/ge6z7aatj3Pn/

Re: If SR length contraction is reversible, why time dilation is not?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: RichD

What's the analogy to the twins paradox, for proper length? I believe someone once posited a rocket containing a spool of cord. The spool unwinds, and the cord trails out the rear. My memory is hazy on the details - -- Rich

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 21 Days 23 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days ago by: Colin Ohba

idiot. The only indicator for the existence of "time" in macro_scale, is *motion* and *entropy* (molecular degradation). It reveals you are an uneducated imbecile, forgetting the disastrous detonation of the two atomic bombs over your

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days ago by: Ken Seto

The only time exist is absolute time. The rate of passage of absolute time (AT) is the same every where in our universe. AT is not sensitive to gravity potential or motion. Unfortunately, there is no clock time unit (including a clock sec

Re: Is a clock second represents the same amount of time (absolute time)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

The answer to your questions depends which Solution Manual you're reading and what edition is it.

Re: Annotated version of SRT

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hachel

His music will never stop. R.H.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Odd Bodkin

Relevant, yes. Not foundational to the meaning of time. You are confusing events which take place at the same place (in the current reference system), for which synchronizing is irrelevant, and events which take place in different loca

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Odd Bodkin

Which of course is always the best way to get a good grip on what a physical concept is. Lol. As discovered by perusing the first few hits in Google. LOL.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Odd Bodkin

Isn’t it funny that you say we have no concept of time, and then turn around and describe the concept?

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Richard Hertz

Actually, the definition that I posted (one of many outputs in Google) is incorrect. Mathematics, as a pure theoretical science, has no use for TIME. Only APPLIED mathematics uses it, but this is outside the realm of the pure mathema

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: The Starmaker

Now, if you notice search results for : instructor's solution manual https://www.pdfdrive.com/search?q=instructor%27s+solution+manual&pagecount=&pubyear=&searchin=&em is like it is needed like there is no tomorrow! and if you just searc:

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 1 Hour ago by: Maciej Wozniak

Sure, it's easy to understand that the predictions of The Shit are consistent with the predictions of The Shit; though, of course there are exceptions.

Re: Concepts about time in Einstein's ‚On the el

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

Actually he did. See here quote from page 2, §2 3rd paragraph I would interpret his statement, that he regarded simultinaety as important for a definition of time. But time is usually based on the idea of counting events, which occu

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Al Coe

It's self-evident that, in terms of any inertial coordinate system, a circular disk rotating about a fixed normal axis through its center can be created... in infinitely many ways. The point about how solid objects change during active a

Re: Is a clock second represents the same amount of time (absolute

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

That depend on clock. It often happens, frames or not, that it doesn't.

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

not true, it travels spherically. Even lasers travels in steradians, hence still spherically, and gets "lesser", or rather spread spherically. I wonder how it relates to photons.

Is a clock second represents the same amount of time (absolute time)

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

The answer is NO. Delta (t')=gamma*Delta(t) What this mean is that a clock second does not represent the same amount of time (absolute time ) in different frames. IOW, a clock second is not an absolute interval of time. Question: Why do p

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Thomas Heger

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 event

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Maciej Wozniak

In math time can be defined many ways, but math is reasonable enough to avoid trying. And the main function of time is positioning event, poor idiot Einstein was right assuming it's a coordinate.

Re: Stationary Points in Space

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 2 Hours ago by: Tom Roberts

You OBVIOUSLY do not know anything about the big bang. This is COMPLETELY WRONG, as there is no "point of the big bang". Because you're looking at a list of ELEMENTARY physics textbooks. Photons are an aspect of QED, which is an advance

Re: Imbecile Thomas Heger perseveres

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hachel

No comment. R.H.

Re: Why no length contraction?

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: sepp623@yahoo.com

Let a steel disc of radius R+r spin with a fixed spin rate in F0 be centered at (0,0) in F0. Let a laser knife be positioned at (R,0). Let the laser-knife reduce the radius of the disc to R as measured in F0 and let R be large enough s

Re:_Concepts_about_time_in_Einstein's_‚On_the_elec

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: Richard Hertz

Time is the continued sequence of existence and events that occurs in an apparently irreversible succession from the past, through the present, into the future. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time (You can see clocks from Einstein's epoch

Re: Clocks run at different rates in different gravitational

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: Ken Seto

Liar, it is true.

Re: yet another nazi pig, JanPB, evacuated:

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

Yet another stinking nazi pig. I hear the shithole polakia, a russian federation territory, is preparing to occupy the "polish" regions of the nazi shithole "ukraine", another russian federation territory. You disgusting uneducated na

Re: [OnT] impertinent putrid nazi troll Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn,

sci.physics.relativity

Posted: 22 Days 3 Hours ago by: Colin Ohba

You stupid braindead nazi, he is a stinking khazar, a *goy*, "a dog you may not eat at the table" according to the Bible. A gay actor, made "president" by the oligarchs to subjugate the citizens, in the *_P_O_O_R_E_S_T_* shithole "cou

1186 recent articles found.

rocksolid light 0.7.2
clearneti2ptor