Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: "kenseto" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 08:17:28 -0400
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:JAqji.565025$6P2.366932@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
kenseto wrote:through
"Jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6oNii.8415$Zt6.7938@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
kenseto wrote:
"jem" <xxx@xxxxxxx> wrote in messageDuh! Didn't I just tell you that SR says it /isn't/ able to fit
news:iEMii.8412$Zt6.3916@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
through? Are you working on your Space Cadet certification, or what?
Duh....didn't Roberts and you say that you can rotate a rod to fit
fitthe door way? Now you are saying that a circular plate can't rotate and
through the door way. Does that mean that the SR concept of rotation
(geometric projection) is a bunch of bull ***? BTW the SR mutal time
dilation and mutual length contraction are derived from the same SR bull
*** of geometric projection.
Get a 4 year-old to explain to you why a jar's contents can be
extracted with a spoon, but not with the jar's removable top.
So are you saying that the SR concept of geometric projection is valid only
for skinny rods and not for objects that are 3 dimensional?? Don't you see
how stupid such assertion is?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: mgconsolidated
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: kenseto
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: jem
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: kenseto
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: jem
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: kenseto
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: Jem
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: kenseto
- Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- From: jem
- So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- Prev by Date: A new mathematical source of curvature?
- Next by Date: Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- Previous by thread: Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- Next by thread: Re: So... Lerentz Contractions are *physical* not observered?
- Index(es):