Re: SR time dilation on remote objects ?

From: George Dishman (george_at_briar.demon.co.uk)
Date: 09/26/04 

Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 15:51:46 +0100

"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in message
news:cj6jbd$d7l$2@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
> George Dishman wrote:
> [snip]
>
>
> > If the correct formula is sqrt(fR * fS), then obviously
> > fS would be wrong because it is different. If you had
> > showed that fS was correct, then SR would be wrong, but
> > you showed fS was wrong - you got your logic the wrong
> > way round as well.
>
> He thinks that by showing that the SR formula can be written
> as sqrt(fR * fS), where fR and fS are the formulas for *sound*,
> not for light, he has shown that the SR formula can't be valid
> for light.
>
> And he really thinks that that is a logical argument.
>
> What can one do in the sight of such utter nonsense? Apparently
> he is totally impervious to math and logic.

Small steps. By showing him that he has got
the wrong equation for sound, hopefully some
sense of embarrassment will suggest he checks
what he is going to post before hitting the
send button. I'm leaving you to address the
cosmological aspects because I don't think
he knows the fundamentals well enough even to
understand your posts. I try to get to the
base of a problem - Doppler for sound in this
case - and then build on that. The next step
would be to address the question of symmetry
but that's still a long, long way from using
R(t) and GR so good luck getting anything
across. Still, your thread is the only one
that is even remotely on-topic at the moment
so I hope you keep at it.

best regards
George