Re: Twin paradox resolved - big error in Relativity !

Dear Thomas:

"Thomas" <thomas.smid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1124552257.953861.28840@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> N:dlzc D:aol T:com (dlzc) wrote:
>
>>
>> You have most of the basic errors in that webpage, Thomas.
>> Instantaneous communcation (perhaps using zero energy
>> tachyons,
>> note your use of "simultaneous"). You think that time
>> dilation
>> and/or length contraction only occur because you signal with
>> light. You attempt to avoid the simple disproof of your
>> assertions using solar muons, because some mysterious effects
>> are
>> raised by "charged particles moving in electric and magnetic
>> fields". Too bad you don't know that the decay rate of
>> neutrons
>> (neutrally charged particles) are also affected by their
>> velocity, as are other uncharged species.
>>
>> Bill was being kind. Your webpage is just another example of
>> "Einstein bashing", on par with "Moon hoaxers" and
>> "Planet-Xers".
>> Have you actually read any books on relativity, or did you
>> spawn
>> your web pages from others?
>
> It seems you haven't read my previous post (25) above. The
> example
> given on my page
> http://www.physicsmyths.org.uk/timedilation.htm does
> not depend on any signal propagation time.

I have read it. The example on the webpage uses the word
"simultaneous". In the usual definition, this involves light
propagation. Define it so that it is not. Note that the "speed
of sound" in a material (the fastest that one can transmit a
"material signal") is still a function of c.

> And just for your information, I have an M.Sc. in Physics and a
> Ph.D. in Astronomy, so I should have a sufficient background in
> Relativity to make my own judgements here.

Your own judgements? Sure, a four year old child can make
judgements.

> If you are not happy with them that's your
> problem, but don't try to discredit other peoples views without
> actually giving some valid scientific arguments.

Done. Ignored. As expected. Reiterated in short sentences so
that you can comprehend:
1) "simultaneous" is frame dependent,
2) all signalling occurs at c or less,
3) all distance is a function of c and time,
4) your "charge" mystery is your ignorance.

Shall I start a webpage, showing how Thomas is wrong?

David A. Smith


.

Relevant Pages