Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT
From: Androcles (Androcles_at_)
Date: 02/15/05
- Next message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: shevek4_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Ambiguity in the "Affine Connection""
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Reply: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 23:56:42 GMT
"Daryl McCullough" <stevendaryl3016@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cut6k202uof@drn.newsguy.com...
> Androcles says...
>
>>You snipped
>>
>>"So in the ground frame, then, the B frame is moving at v/2
>>and the G frame is moving at -v/2. That IS good news. Perhaps
>>we can now cease being concerned about A and B being points
>>in space in some god-forsaken rest frame."
>
> That's because it is false. It is true for Galilean
> relativity, but not Special Relativity.
Yes, I'm used to your denials, McCullough.
Which frame is the one that has the time dilation, then?
B or G?
Tell me up front, and I'll prove it is the other one.
Androcles.
- Next message: Albert: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Previous message: shevek4_at_yahoo.com: "Re: Ambiguity in the "Affine Connection""
- In reply to: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Next in thread: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Reply: Daryl McCullough: "Re: Androcles asks for Derivation of LT"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|