Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited


"G" <gehan.ameresekere@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2a61d98a-c558-4938-85fa-56787855ef9e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 15, 1:47 am, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Uncle Ben" <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:e2fe378a-52e4-4020-82fc-63ec98793e2e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 14, 12:47 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



"Uncle Ben" <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:a5784f02-6189-4fdd-94b5-033099bd93eb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 14, 8:30 am, Uncle Ben <b...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

(Note: I avoided the term "closing speed" so as not to cause
Androcles
heart failure.)
How can they fix this problem? They have to build their own clock
system. Their clocks must be re-synchronized. In particular a moving
clock at B must be set to the time that Androcles ridicules: (t1+t2)/
2, in an obvious notation.

Nobody claimed (t1+t2)/ 2 at all, you useless LYING fucking moron!

(t0 +t2)/2 = t1 is correct.
tau0 = t0 at the epoch of emission.
tau1 = t1 at the epoch of reflection.
tau2 does NOT equal t1 at the epochs of the two receptions.

By simple substitution,
(tau0 +t2)/2 = tau1 is incorrect, t2 <> tau1.

Hence (tau0 + tau2)/2 CANNOT equal tau1 as claimed.
QED, fuckwit.

We assume that this definition of synchronism is free from
contradictions,
and possible for any number of points; and that the following relations
are
universally valid:--

1.. If the clock at B synchronizes with the clock at A, the clock at A
synchronizes with the clock at B.
2.. If the clock at A synchronizes with the clock at B and also with
the
clock at C, the clocks at B and C also synchronize with each other. --
Albert Einstein.

Time is relative!

Time is NOT and cannot be relative, blabbering fuckwit.

You got me good, John. I guess they should start tearing down the LHC
to make way for a r0oller-coaster.

Uncle Ben

It's "Dr. Parker" or "Androcles" to you, you ignorant lying ***. "John"
is for my friends and family, you are an enemy of science.
Guess all you want to, the LHC will only work when it has been properly
programmed without Einstein's bull***. Engineers don't guess.

Will read the stuff. Good links here all around.

Engineers don't guess?

Of course not. You wouldn't board a plane built by guesswork unless you
were a lunatic. Do you imagine I could get away with guessing the self-test
circuitry for Concorde's analogue computers? Lives depend on engineers
not guessing.

Bonehead guesses "they" should start tearing down the LHC. He's a
complete idiot.Even though he admits he's lost his argument he'll still
keep bullshitting and telling lies.


Suppose you were on a spacecraft
that travelled from Earth to a location in space and back to Earth so
that the elapsed time aboard the spaceship as calcuated by SRT
is 200 hours less than the time t1 elapsed on earth.

What does an idiot calculation by SRT have to do with me being on
a spacecraft?


a) Will you take enough oxygen on board for a duration of t1 hours?
b) Will you take enought oxygen for a duration of t1-200 hours?

Would you bet your life on it?

This question is for Ben and others as well

I'm not stupid enough to get on it in the first place. I'm an engineer,
not a lunatic.
Understand something. When I say "engineer" I mean a designer,
not a train driver. Engineering design means paying attention to the
smallest detail, one thin corroded hydraulic brake pipe can kill.
Some accidents are outside our control, such as the recent loss
of the French Airbus, but you can be certain the air accident
investigators are all over it like flies on ***. I for one do not want
to be responsible for anyone's death, to say nothing of professional
pride in doing a good job. Concorde flew for 30 years, I was a part
of it (among hundreds of others) and the only accident was caused
by debris on the runway, outside the control of any engineer.
That's REALITY, not Einstein's erroneous scribbling on paper.
Engineers do not guess. Anyone that guesses isn't an engineer.


.

Quantcast