Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM <ybmess@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:53:55 +0100
rbwinn a écrit :
On Nov 29, 7:17�pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:YBM a �crit :
rbwinn a �crit :Reading it again, I realized that it is even worse than false, itOn Nov 28, 8:04 pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:This is false - period.rbwinn a crit :Well, no, I have not changed my mind. �According to scientists, theOn Nov 28, 1:53 pm, YBM <ybm...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:...Forgot "length contraction", you have no clue about what it could meanSorry Robert, but you are pretending SR and LT to say something thatWell, the main problem I see with it is that you cannot do it without
it DOES NOT say. As a matter of fact it is quite easy to show that
SR says that if a light front is spherical in frame S it is so in
frame S'.
a length contraction.
in SR.
Is, according to LT, a light front spherical or not in S', given that
it is spherical in S ?
If you've changed your mind on this (as it seems), are you about to
admit it? Could you explain why and when you've changed your mind
then?
light front is spherical in S' as seen from S', but is an oblate
spheroid in S' as seen from S.
makes absolutely no sense:
What could "whatever in S' as seen from S" mean? I remember that years
ago stupid Seto try this angle against SR but the obvious absurdity of
the very concept made him retire to most usual crackpot strategies (such
as misunderstanding closing velocities, an old trick known as "the
Androcles stupid move").
The interesting point is that we see here a crackpot (Robert Winn) which
is so retarded that he is unable to identify previous tricks used and
burned by his fellow retarded (Androcles, Seto, Wilson, etc.)
Poor Robert, not only he is an obvious joke for anyone knowing a bit of
basic algebra or physics, but he is a joke even for the most retarded of
usual cranks from s.r.p.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It does not work on me, YBM.
You are the one playing with nonsense words, the only ones who could say
"it does not work me" are people reading you, not you.
What could precisely mean "in S' as seen from S" Robert ?
I do not believe in the length contraction.
I do not even care what scientists say about it.
So, for you, this is only two concatenated words "length" and
"contraction". You don't know what it could mean but you don't "believe"
in it. This is a kind of mental illness: being afraid of words
independantly of what they means. This has nothing to do in a sci.*
group. You are the one who should ask about psychology on another
relevant newsgroup.
I think that scientists of today are among the most deluded people who
ever lived.
I don't think so. For any sane human being it is quite clear that anyone
able to write this :
> So as you can see, a sphere expanding with a radius of cn' takes a
> time of vt/c to reach x', takes a time of t to reach y' and takes a
> time of 0 to reach z.
is not only deluded, but mentally ill.
Moreover the ways you had to lie on what people wrote, to falsify
quotes in this very thread gives a very fine image (even if disgusting)
of your mind.
.
- References:
- coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: PD
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: YBM
- Re: coordinates and equations.
- From: rbwinn
- coordinates and equations.
- Prev by Date: Re: Einstein's Second Postulate Violates His First.
- Next by Date: Re: coordinates and equations.
- Previous by thread: Re: coordinates and equations.
- Next by thread: Re: coordinates and equations.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|