Re: The Paradox No Relativist Can Weasel Out Of

From: Dirk Van de moortel (dirkvandemoortel_at_ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com)
Date: 09/23/04 

Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:13:25 GMT

"Nth Complexity" <spam@this-dot-instead.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message news:41521bf4_1@127.0.0.1...
> > Russell Blackadarwrote:
> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > Well, it's easy to prove that the combination is not L,
> > and that Lx Ly is not the same as Ly Lx.
> >
> Even his example of two successive L's in the same spatial
> direction is wrong, and for the same reason. Yes it yields
> a Lorentz transformation (as does *any* composition of boosts)
> but it's not the transformation for v1 + v2.[/quote:02411abd1d]
>
> You are completely missing the point. The point is not whether
> the product of boosts Lx Ly = Ly Lx, the point is that there is no
> boost equal to that product Lx Ly.

If that is your point then you should have said it like that.
But in stead you said:
   "Note that the product of Lx and Ly is not the same as L."
If the product Lx Ly is not the same as Ly Lx, then neither
one of them can be the same as L, by symmetry.

Now that you know that there is no boost for Lx Ly, you
suddenly claim that *that* was your point.

Gee, you are a dishonest person.
And stupid.

Dirk Vdm

Relevant Pages