The end of the Spacetime Diagram

[alen]

I have dramatised the title of this thread to
emphasise the significance of the argument I have
posted at the link below, and not in order to
create an atmosphere of confrontation.

The argument is to prove that, if events within a
moving inertial frame are examined in what I call
a 'spacelike manner', no foreshortening effect will
be evident. Only if they are examined in a lightlike
manner will such an effect appear. This is fully
argued at the website.

The absence of a spacelike foreshortening means that
a spacetime relationship, involving a spacetime
rotation of the moving frame, relative to the
stationary frame, cannot be a valid representation
of the really existing relationship of the two frames.
That is why I referred to the 'end of the spacetime
diagram'.

This diagram can be no more than a pictorial
representation of the transformation equations,
rather than a representation of the real reference
frames in a real spacetime. Consequently, the concept
of reference frames travelling along different paths
in spacetime is a concept without meaning, and the
spacetime diagram thus cannot be used to solve,
for example, the twins paradox.

http://home.westserv.net.au/~alen1/Physics/aIntroduction.htm

Alen

[Dirk Van de moortel]

"alen" <al...@westserv.net.au> wrote in message news:dfca704b.04030...@posting.google.com...

> I have dramatised the title of this thread to
> emphasise the significance of the argument I have
> posted at the link below, and not in order to
> create an atmosphere of confrontation.

Then we will have to confront you -again- with the
fact that this is the umpteenth time you show with
this nonsense.

>
> The argument is to prove that, if events within a
> moving inertial frame are examined in what I call
> a 'spacelike manner',

Last time you got this reply:
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=j3ynb.112041$Pl3.5...@phobos.telenet-ops.be
If at all possible, try to recycle it.

Dirk Vdm