Re: Length Contraction Fully Explained


kk aka Kakahead wrote:

xray4abc wrote:
kk wrote:
At this crucial point, it should be clear to anyone
that 50% of special relativity consists solely of
a mere definition, and a definition is not physics.

Wrong !

No, I am right. You are wrong because you do not
understand the difference between Galileo's clocks
and Einstein's.

Cretin. Persistent, too.


I can prove this by simply challenging you to show
how they both look on paper. Put up or shut up.

Galileo's clocks yield correct measurements because
they are absolutely synchronous.

Einstein's clocks yield incorrect measurements
because they are forced by definition to
conform to Einstein's false belief that
clocks must be set to get "c" one way.

Imbecile. Persistent, too.


Contrary to you, getting incorrect measurements
because of a baseless definition is NOT physics.

---

Except that it is supported by multiple experiments, shieater.

.