Re: transformation equations

On Sep 18, 12:10�pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 18, 12:19�pm, rbwinn <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:



I did not say I do not understand relativity, you did. �

And this is not a matter of opinion. If you want to assess whether you
understand physics, you ask a physicist. I would not claim to
understand dentistry on my own assessment without checking with a
dentist; doing otherwise would be foolish.

So I said,
just post what you think I do not understand about it.

I did. Did you not understand what I said?

�It is not my
job to do anything with regard to this. �I do not work for the
government. �Scientists are the ones who benefit from socialism.. �All
I do is pay taxes.
But from what you have said so far, scientists regard relativity as a
top secret item of government information, and if a taxpayer tries to
write something about relativity, scientists are obligated to say that
what was said was wrong because there is an unauthorized person
attempting to discuss something that is top secret and should be known
only to scientists.

Oh, far from it. On the other hand, the fact that it is publicly
funded and supported does not mean that you are entitled to an
education for free. State universities are supported by public funds
-- this does not entitle you to take classes for free. EMS services
and ambulances are supported by public funds, but this does not
entitle you to free services on a 911 call.

So while it is certainly not secret, the onus is on you to avail
yourself of it. This means effort and time at the very least, and it
may mean financial commitment as well, even for things that are
publicly supported.

� � �But it is not really all that difficult. �You have a set of
Caresian coordinates representing one frame of reference, you have
another set of Cartesian coordinates representing another frame of
reference. �One set of Cartesian coordinates moves relative to the
other. �Where do coordinates x,y,z in one set of Cartesian coordinates
appear as x',y',z' in the other set of Cartesian coordinates?

Ah, but see, this is what I'm talking about. You have the impression
that relativity is based on transformation equations from one set of
Cartesian coordinates to another. That couldn't be further from the
truth. Relativity is based on in invariance of physical laws with
inertial reference frame. Your equations that transform one set of
Cartesian coordinates to another set of Cartesian coordinates don't
address physical laws and their invariance at all. You are barking up
the wrong tree.

� � OK, PD, give us the official government answer.

You may need to purchase some transportation to get under the right
tree.



Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There are no trees here in Arizona, PD. A government fire fighter
started a fire several years ago that burned all the trees in the
state. The United States Forest Service kept everyone, including
firefighters, back away from the fire until it ran out of trees to
burn. But when the fire reached Show Low, Arizona, some former
loggers took matters into their own hands and took some heavy
equipment and made a fireline between the town and the fire, so the
fire stopped in that area when the fire reached the fireline. This
was entirely unauthorized, and everyone feels guilty about the town of
Show Low being there today.
So let's talk about invariance of physical laws. The claim of
scientists today is that electromagnetic waves, which are a form of
energy, change frames of reference, which Einstein said could be
represented by sets of Cartesian coordinates, by causing any frame of
reference which moves to be contracted in the direction of motion,
just so that the ideas that scientists have about invariance of the
laws of physics can remain unchanged.
On the other hand, a mathematician could insist that the Cartesian
coordinates remain unchanged, and physicists would have to do more
than just tell everyone else what to believe. We can see that is not
going to work because scientists all depend on the government for
their livlihood, so scientists are enforcing their model of reality.
I personally have to side with what mathematicians have said about the
Galilean transformation equations.
So, as I see it, we are about where Faraday was when the eminent
scientists he worked for as a laboratory technician were trying to
figure out why a magnetic compass would point to a wire through which
an electrical current was running. Faraday tried to tell them that
there had to be a magnetic field around the wire, and the scientists
all said that anyone knew that the electrical current had to remain
inside the wire. The same scientists all later opposed Faraday's
admission into the Royal society of scientists, etc.
So we can see that science has not changed much from that day to
this. Scientists just have more information to be narrow minded
about.
Anyway, I like my concept of light a lot better than the one that
scientists have.
Robert B. Winn
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: transformation equations
    ... understand physics, you ask a physicist. ... Scientists are the ones who benefit from socialism. ... One set of Cartesian coordinates moves relative to the ... started a fire several years ago that burned all the trees in the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Q!Re: Shall We All Leave At Once?
    ... The Travels of Noe into Europe is based on primary and secondary sources including Berosus' Chaldanean history and is not a personal opinion. ... Yove not studied real science or philosophy. ... other scientists - sneer at cosmology these days). ... Most of the elementary particles in modern physics were predicted by the mathematics decades before the equipment could be built to detect them. ...
    (rec.arts.drwho)
  • Re: The Reasonable Minority
    ... the person you are talking about introduce ghosts into his biology the ... it does illustrate the principle that scientists as individuals can be ... B.S. Chemistry, San Diego State University, 1969 ... Robert Kaita holds a Ph.D. in nuclear physics from Rutgers University. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: (mechanical) Gravity
    ... to bravely come back to physics of mechanics. ... What do you think Newton's Universal Law of Gravity is? ... belief of scientists, neutrinos are very interactive. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The Pseudo-Physicist Index (v1.00)
    ... contributions to physics" ... (inspired by John Baez's Crackpot Index athttp://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html): ... "What scientists screw" rhymes. ... Peer review is dangerous to the scientific method. ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast