Re: answer to YBM's bell problem

rbwinn a écrit :
On Sep 9, 5:01�pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
....
You "theory" predict it will ring in A not in B.
If it rings in A, it has to ring in B. What did you think
transformation equations meant?

Right. Then you admit that your set of equations does
not form a transformation and that your "theory" is
meaningless.

So, next time you'll pretend I've proven something, please
don't lie and write that I've proven Robert Winn's modified
"Galilean Transformation" to be absurd.
You can even provide the link:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/a39fe2523de...
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einsteins Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
    ... > Thomas Smid says... ... >>> transformation equations are these ... > They aren't independent variables. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: transformation equations
    ... velocity but you could try to apply LTs to velocities ... But if I do the same thing with the Galilean ... If you do the same with Galilean transformation equations ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: transformation equations
    ... velocity but you could try to apply LTs to velocities ... But if I do the same thing with the Galilean ... If you do the same with Galilean transformation equations ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: bringin einstein and lorentz to justice
    ... observe in K and K' coordinate systems ... the transformation equations. ... That's correct wrt the Lorentz transformations. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: transformation equations
    ... velocity but you could try to apply LTs to velocities ... If you do the same with Galilean transformation equations ... In frame A and in frame B: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)