Re: J. Advanced SR-cult Idiocies and Corruption

From: Androcles (androc1es_at_nospamblueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 10/02/04 

Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 21:22:55 GMT

"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
news:cjn3di$b4$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
| In article <9eD7d.1397$xb.239@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>,
| Androcles <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
| >
| >"Gregory L. Hansen" <glhansen@steel.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in message
| >news:cjmsr2$u5k$1@hood.uits.indiana.edu...
| >| In article <PXz7d.94479$as2.90637@bignews3.bellsouth.net>,
| >| eleaticus <eleaticus@bellsouth.net> wrote:
|
| >| At any rate, I was looking through Einstein's 1905 paper in the English
| >| translation in the little Dover book, and I couldn't find anywhere that
he
| >| asserted anything like x=ct and x=-ct simultaneously for the same
object.
| >| Maybe you could list some equation numbers or something.
| >
| >Be glad to. Page 44, line 8
| >"*IF* we place x' = x-vt..."
| >then on page 48, line 5,
| >
| >"(chsi) = (beta) x'."
| >
| >and of course if we place x' = x+vt, (no reason why not)
| >chsi = (beta) (x+vt)
|
| Are you sure you have the right page there? On page 48, near the top, I
| see a
|
| xi = beta (x - vt)
|
| but nothing like an "and of course if we place x' = x+vt". This is right
| after a section where he discovered that phi(v)=1.

No, there won't be, I added that.
Notice that I included quotation marks when I quoted the paper, although
I deliberately changed
xi = beta (x - vt)
to
xi = beta.x'
to emphasize x' = x-vt.
So yes, it is the right paper.
You can get an online copy at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
if you wish to cut and paste.

| >
| >The Lorentz transforms seem to rely on an "IF".
| >As for time dilation, refer to
| > http://www.androc1es.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/KoksDoppler.htm
| >Obviously tau = (t+vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) for the return journey.
| >since we have t + something, and are dividing that by something less
| >that one, it must take longer to return. The faster you go, the later
| >you'll arrive.
|
| That little peice of flame war doesn't exactly make you look like an
| intellectual powerhouse.

Well, that's not the point. Yes, I am flaming Koks, but that doesn't
change the logic.

| I don't have the patience right now to sift
| through an archived flame fest and figure out what you're doing.

Uh huh...
It does take patience and careful research to discover exactly what
Einstein's flaws are, and nobody will understand them without patience.
You might as well go on insisting he was right along with the rest
of the sheep and live your life in a delusional state, it is of no
consequence
to me. I am patient and there are people capable of being patient also.

But
| I've been through the twin paradox enough times and satisfied myself as
| the basic validity of of the analysis.

Oh, I'm sure you have. Never questioned it, have you?

| And the last time we talked, you
| didn't know how to invert a Lorentz transform. So I think I'll just
| assume you've made an error in there somewhere.

Yes, be impatient and make assumptions. Very wise, I'm sure.
|
| --
| "Never argue with a fool. They will drag you down to their level and win
| by experience."
An excellent piece of advice. I will not argue with you.
*plonk*
Androcles

Relevant Pages
Quantcast