Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
eleaticus  
View profile  
 More options Mar 7 2005, 10:31 am
Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity, alt.physics
From: "eleaticus" <eleati...@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 09:31:41 -0600
Local: Mon, Mar 7 2005 10:31 am
Subject: Re: (SR) Lorentz t', x' = Intervals

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ew...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
message news:1l5uf2-d08.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net...

> In sci.physics, Dirk Van de moortel
> <dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com>
> > Ghost, the only thing he can do, is a bit of algebra.
> > He doesn't even know what x and t are supposed
> > to stand for. He has no idea what the equations
> > are supposed to mean:
> >   http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Crimes.html
> An interesting notion, that. :-)  I wonder what statute.

rofflmfao!

Ghost, have you gone completely nuts?   The crime is multiple contradictions
of yourself:
-----------------------------------
Einstein initiates his process by asserting four basic equations and
adds a fifth in his process:

 x =  ct
 x = -ct
 x =  vt

 x' =  ct'
 x' = -ct'

There are several crimes against logic and science in the assertion of
that set of equations.
-------------------------------

Any ONE of the equations would be OK but any two of the set of three
consititute an absurdity and the second set constitutes an absurdity.
Several SR-cult cretins admitted Einstein was in error on this, probably
including the psychomoron, Dirk, being corrupt enough to imagine that their
godlet didn't do such a thing. I thibnk Dirk was one of them.

Tell us again how you wonder what the crime is, Ghost.

BTW, it being obvious from the word go the Dirk is the slimiest of the
SR-cult cretins on rgp/etc I not once before this ever looked at his crap.
Little did I know he is one of the least talented a junior high students in
the country!

> > He talks about "moving values":

http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/VectorFiasco.html

> Sigh.  In SR, v is *supposed* to be constant.

rofflmfao!

Which part of this material quoted do you think contradicts that, Ghost:
-----------------
Nominally, the velocity v is taken by SR-cultists as being a constant
although in fact what is a positive velocity in one system is a
negative velocity in the other.
------------------------------------------------------------

Do you or do you not know that with the positive directions of the x and x'
axes in the same direction, what the x systems sees as +v for the other
system,  is seen by the x' system as -v for the first system?

Hunh?  Do you or do you not understand that?

Your response to Dirk's idiocy is moronic.

> > He asks you to "Apply the Lorentz transformation
> > to the Galilean transfomation equation":

http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/ShowFormula.html

> This gets complicated.

ROFFLMFAO!

No complication at all. The idiot Dirk sees a request - stated two ways -
that 'you' show two DIFFERENT transformations, and the apparent volunteer
idiot, Ghost, makes idiotic agreement with him:
---------------------

Yet, I am the one who can accomplish the task both ways - correctly and the
SR-cult cretin way - and you are the one that would have to violate your
cult's dogma to do it right.

Let A be the general formula in x for the area of a rectangle with its lower
left corner at the origin of x and with its height being h.

Show the formula.

Then transform the formula for A to A', given the simple Newtonian/Galilean
transform x'=x-vt, and using the SR-cult approach to Newtonian/Galilean
transformation of equations .
-----------------------------------------------

So, Ghost, tell us how I was asking for the use of Lorentz in the Galilean
transforms.

For that matter, meet the challenge you cannot meet in the last section.

Innyhoo, I wish I had been following up on Dirk's pandora crap. It is a
marvellous source of SR-cretin idiocy and psychosis material!

The fun thing is any honest person who looks at the stuff realizes he is
psycho.

Why weren't you able to give the material an honest read, Ghost?

eleaticus

> #191, ewi...@earthlink.net
> It's still legal to go .sigless.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.