Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited

On Jun 20, 9:09 pm, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Dono." <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:c9a6505d-014d-49db-9b55-6384398d5919@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Jun 20, 6:58 pm, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Bruce Richmond" <bsr3...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:eb8312a7-ecd5-4260-a9ce-9260a673e6a1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 20, 9:18 am, "kens...@xxxxxxxxxx" <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 19, 5:58 pm, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:3316ab13-8dfb-45ea-9940-d67bfe6fb1b9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 19, 11:47 am, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:3823cbdf-57a9-475a-91c6-47f17d610537@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 19, 9:32 am, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:7bc938ee-a338-460d-bec0-8d2de8eec1c8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Jun 18, 8:53 pm, "Dono." <sa...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 18, 1:43 pm, "kensh...@xxxxxxxxxx"
<kens...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
one-way isotropy does not mean one-way value of the
speed
of
light has the same values at different distance. I You
can
have
200000
km/sec isotropy or 300000 km isotropy.
Ken Seto
Ken Shito
What does OWLS isotropy mean if you already know that
TWLS=300,000km/
s?
Hey ***-head....it means nothing until you perform the OWLS
measurement directly.

Well, it has meaning .. it means the speed of light is
independent of
direction.

But it does not mean that OWLS has the same value when the two
synchronized clocks are separated at different distances.
That's
the
reason why physicists refused to do any direct OWLS
measurement.

No physicist (other than youself if we extend the term to include
you)
thinks that

You can bring the clocks back by the conveying screws and if they
show
the same elapsed time then they were synchroneous when they were
apart.

That proves nothing.

It proved that the clocks were running at the same rate when they
were apart. If they were running at different rates then the
accumulated clock seconds for both clocks should be different.

If moving them apart makes them go out of sync,

Clearly you don't understand SR and LET. Both Sr and LET say that
moving the clocks apart in the opposite directions with the same
velocity the clocks will remain synchronize.

Clearly you don't understand SR or LET.

HAHAHA .. you're funny.

According to the Hafele–
Keating experiment

Are you using that as an example as well .. Dono tried that too :)

You are STILL not paying attention,

You're a bit of a black pot there :)

The train car is moving with speed
V wrt the observer on the tracks. The clock moves with speed +v / -v
inside the car. Is this clearer now? I used haefel-Keating as a hint,
that's all.

I don't give a stuff about what observers on the track see .. none of that
has anything to do with what was being debated. You've been sidetracked by
him from the point being discussed.


No, I simply pointed out to you that you aren't answering his
challenge. This has been going on for quite a few posts. He has a
valid point: in the track frame the clocks are desynchronized.

No.. he's just succeeded in distracting you as well from the point he was
claiming, by making some other valid claim. Its a good trick that. This is
how he plays the game

I know, I have a lot more experience with him, you are just
starting...
The problem is interesting though , I even challenged you a few posts
back to calculate the desynchronization in the track frame, you never
answered....




There was no car .. this is all Bruce's attempt at distracting you from his
several mistakes. He's succeeded brilliantly.


He introduced it in the post where I picked up this thread. He is
devious, you'd better get used to that, there is a lot of vaues in
discussing with crackpots, they can be quite crafty.
The value is that you now have a more challenging problem on your
hands, try solving the new problem, it is more interesting than the
original one.


But they are NOT
moving with equal speeds wrt the ground.
So, when the clocks reach their respective ends of the car they are
synced up in the car frame but they have become (predictably)
desynchronized in the track frame.

Yes .. true, but irrelevant. You've fallen victim to a game of distraction.


No, I haven't. I accept their challenges as they keep making them up.
The point of this game is not to convince a crackpot that he's wrong
(you NEVER will) but to overcome all their challenges, no matter how
dishones or crazy they are. This turns you into a much better person.
I enjoy this game, the ones who take it to an extreme are the 3
"shitos" (Albetshito,Juanshito and Ken Shito).


Have a look at the things he said

I claimed that SR says that moving a clock DOES affect its setting though..
Even though in its own frame, where it is not moving, it ticks as it should.
The trick is to move the two clocks in opposite directions at the same speed
over the same distance and then stop them at the same time.


Yes, I know but the cranks make the rules, get used to it. You may
want to have a look at Paul Draper (PD), paul Anderson and Tom
Roberts, they are totally unfazed by these tactics. You will learn...



He's made a number of mistakes that I have pointed out. He still doesn't
seem to understand. You're adding fuel to the fire by coming in partway
thru his game of distraction. You need to read all this in context.

Welcome to the club. parting words: you will NEVER win an argument
with a true crank. But you will learn tremendously from the
interaction.

.

Quantcast