Re: A New Solution to the Twins Paradox, and Others


"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:moce05-9l2.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: In sci.physics.relativity, Androcles
: <Engineer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: wrote
: on Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:38:36 GMT
: <0DQYi.60600$7_4.10837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
: >
: > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
: > news:dduc05-res.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
: >: In sci.physics.relativity, Koobee Wublee
: >: <koobee.wublee@xxxxxxxxx>
: >: wrote
: >: on Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:12:39 -0000
: >: <1194502359.190713.69850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
: >: > On Nov 7, 8:35 pm, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
: >: >> In sci.physics.relativity, Eric Gisse wrote:
: >: >
: >: >> > Why does the idiot Koobee Wublee continue to assert that the
Lorentz
: >: >> > transform has ANY ROLE in resolving the twins paradox?
: >: >>
: >: >> Um....I've probably missed a lot here, but if one properly
: >: >> uses the Lorentz the Twin Paradox falls in one's lap rather
: >: >> easily.
: >
: > There are no "Lorentz", you can't derive them.
: >
:
: Since your postulates are different from Einstein's, of course I can't.

Um....I've probably missed a lot here, but if one properly uses the
phlogiston one can wash one's socks in it.

I'll rephrase. You can't logically derive the cuckoo malformations
Einstein blamed on Lorentz using Einstein's postulates and neither
can anyone else.

Einstein's postulates are
1) "Prominent theoretical physicists were therefore more inclined to reject
the principle of relativity, in spite of the fact that no empirical data had
been found which were contradictory to this principle " -- because I say so,
however logical
theoretical physicists would never dream of doing so. This is based on the
maxim
"The Lord said unto Moses,
All Jews shall have big noses."
Big noses are prominent noses.

2) "light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c
which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body" -- because
I say so and it waves the aether if I don't get a Nobel prize for the
photo-electric effect, I know how to cover my arse.

3) 'the "time" required by light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it
requires
to travel from B to A' because I say so.

4) I can use c+v to prove I can't use c+v.

Catch 22:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif


Heller wrote: "There was only one catch and that was Catch 22, which
specified that a concern for one's safety in the face of dangers that were
real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.
"Orr (a character in the novel) was crazy and could be grounded. All he had
to do was ask, and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would
have to fly more missions.

"Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, but if he
was sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn't have
to; but if he didn't want to he was sane and had to."

In Einstein's case if you use c+v you can derive c = (c+v)/(1+v/c) from
the cuckoo malformations he blamed on Lorentz. That says you can't
use c+v.

What troll kooks like Schwartz, Poe, McCullough, Roberts, Draper, Lawrence,
Andersen and Wills et. al. fail to realise is the existence of isomorphism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isomorphism
between Sagnac's real experiment and Einstein's thought experiment,
shown here:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/TwoSpeedRack.gif

Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, the rack
moving at velocity v in his pipe dream.
http://spyhunter007.com/Images/disney_alice_caterpillar.jpg

Sagnac sends the light around the gear wheel for real.
If you analyse one you should get the same result as the other, but
you cannot use SR to derive SR, that is petitio principii, circularity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question

c+v is essential to the derivation of the cuckoo malformations, the
part where Einstein screws up is:
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO. -- Rabbi Albert Einstein

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/tAB=tBA.gif

Here are some mathematical proofs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_proof

Not included are
Proof by "because I say so",
Proof by "everybody knows",
Proof by "it is written",
the three most popular forms used in sci.physics.relativity.

You'll often see this pathetic mob muttering "Lorentz Transformations"
but they haven't a clue how they are derived and faithfully follow their
indoctrination like lemmings.

Catch 22:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img22.gif
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img76.gif

Prediction:
The troll kooks will ignore it, they are too stooopid to understand a
proof.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Contraction Dilemma
    ... |> I get your point but is this NG a pub or soccer game? ... "Orr was crazy and could be grounded. ... "Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, ... Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Comment on Wikipedia entry: Simple inference of time dilation
    ... "Orr was crazy and could be grounded. ... "Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, ... Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, ... to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Relativity
    ... Does anyone really understand relativity? ... "Orr was crazy and could be grounded. ... "Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, ... Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Four mirror Sagnac
    ... :>: phase relationship) from the Sagnac experiment on not the other way ... I'm saying read what Einstein wrote, ... "Orr was crazy and could be grounded. ... "Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Comment on Wikipedia entry: Simple inference of time dilation
    ... with the derivation. ... "Orr was crazy and could be grounded. ... "Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn't, ... Einstein sends light along the rack and back again, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)