Re: The Most Rigid Taboo in Relativity

O'Harry wrote:

> Hey Tim, you forgot to reply on my question to you!

I didn't forget. Your question was irrelevant bull***, as are
most of your postings. I wasn't addressing anything Einstein
wrote. To the best of my knowledge, neither O'Harry nor the
brilliant Pentcho are reincarnations of Einstein.

Your lack of understanding of relativity has alerady led you to
write contradictory statements in this thread. You claim that in
the case of "straight line motion" leads to a measurement of a
clock slowing, while also claiming that "a clock moved in a
closed curve with constant velocity" (really should be speed, but
we already know that precision is not your thing) leads to a
measurement of a clock speeding up. If you don't know how to
draw a curve containing a section that consists of a straight
line, you are even stupider than I thought. So in other words,
according to O'Harry, a moving twin can measure the stay-at-home
clock to run both slower and faster.

Should O'Harry wish to state this correctly, he just might find
out that using well-defined frames is an important concept for an
unambiguous explanation. All this crap about clock rate changes
does absolutely nothing to correctly represent relativity.


---Tim Shuba---
.

Quantcast