Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: Preferred Frame Theory indistinguishable from SR
Replies: 204   Last Post: Jul 13, 2010 11:11 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Koobee Wublee Posts: 1,417 Registered: 2/21/06
Re: Preferred Frame Theory indistinguishable from SR
Posted: Jul 1, 2010 12:55 AM

On Jun 30, 5:19 pm, "whoever" wrote:
> "Koobee Wublee" wrote:

> >Nonsense and mysticism. <shrug>
>
> It may seem it to someone as uneducated as you.

Ahahaha... Let me show you. Come on right in.

> >Where is this Einstein?s paper on such provision then?
>
> In the Lorentz transforms .. commonly the part called relativity of
> simultaneity.

Where is this magical time dilation correction at turn around? It is
nowhere to be found in the Lorentz transform nor in this relative
simultaneity thing. <shrug>

> >In real life, there is no paradox.
>
> Nor in Sr

SR is merely a fvcked conjecture/interpretation to the Lorentz
transform. SR is never the problem. The Lorentz transform is.
<shrug>

> > Any conjecture that manifests a

>
> Indeed it is

I know the Lorentz transform is garbage. <shrug>

> > such as SR. <shrug>
>
> No paradox in SR. . If you know of any acutal paradoxes (rather than just
> unintuitive or surprising results), please feel free to post them

Yes, the Lorentz transform manifests this twins' paradox thing.
<shrug>

> >Where is the math that shows this turn around thing?
>
> It called the Lorentz Transforms. You apply them when changing from one
> frame of reference to another .. which is what happens to the travelling
> twins when they change their direction of motion.

You still have not shown me the math that describes any turn-around.
<shrug>

> if you had any knowledge of physics, you may have heard of these transforms,
> or even how to apply them. Shame you don't

You need to show the math. If not, get lost. <shrug>

> >What SR says is all in the Lorentz transform?
>
> All that is relevant to this scenario

If you really understand the Lorentz transform, you will know this
You will tell you the same thing. <shrug>

> > When are you going to
> > understand the Lorentz transform?

>
> Years ago. Shame you are just not able to handle it yourself.

Although I am a lousy poker player in which I don't bluff, I can see
you as an illiterate on the Lorentz transform. Oh, the tell-tale sign
is claiming the mathematics of the turn-around is within this
transform. Yes, I call your bluff. <shrug>

> If you're as clever as you think .. YOU show the math for the symmetric

I have done that in the past. I and others have suggested the two
traveling twins with identical acceleration profiles to nullify this
so-called turn-around nonsense to ease every skeptic's mind. In
addition, I have proposed variable cruising time with no acceleration
to build up this uneven time dilation. Hey, it is strictly all in the
mathematics. You are indeed very fvcking stupid if you still cannot
see the checkmate. <shrug>

> You are the one claiming such contradictions exist.

Yes, but others did too. Either I am a genius, or you are just
fvcking stupid as hell. <shrug>

> Let see your attempt before I post mine
> .. otherwise you'll just claim that you could do it all along

away from this magical turn-around thing to nullify the time dilation
problem. You are on your own. In case if you still cannot figure it
out. Oh, well, you are indeed a moron ranting something that other
self-styled physicists have abandoned since. <shrug>

The turn-around thing is stupid. The one who first proposed that was
none other than Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar.
Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar was actually the
biggest nincompoop of all. The Lorentz transform was Poincare's
work. The mistake was also within Poincare not Einstein the nitwit,
the plagiarist, and the liar. Relative simultaneity was again
Poincare's analysis to the nonsense of the Lorentz transform not
Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar. The field
equations were first derived by Hilbert, after pulling out that bogus
so-called Lagrangian from his own ass, not Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar. Realizing there are infinity solutions that
are static, spherically symmetric, and asymptotically flat to the
field equations, Hilbert realizing what a Frankenstein he had created
decided to walk away from it and allowed Einstein the nitwit, the
plagiarist, and the liar to take full credit. <shrug>

Date Subject Author
6/26/10 Koobee Wublee
6/26/10 Koobee Wublee
6/26/10 Peter Webb
6/29/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 artful
7/2/10 harald
7/2/10 Androcles
7/2/10 Daryl McCullough
7/2/10 harald
7/2/10 Daryl McCullough
7/2/10 PD
7/3/10 colp
7/3/10 eric gisse
7/5/10 harald
7/5/10 Daryl McCullough
7/11/10 harald
7/11/10 Daryl McCullough
7/11/10 Daryl McCullough
7/11/10 colp
7/11/10 eric gisse
7/12/10 harald
7/12/10 Daryl McCullough
7/12/10 harald
7/12/10 Daryl McCullough
7/13/10 harald
6/29/10 colp
6/29/10 PD
7/1/10 artful
7/2/10 PD
7/3/10 colp
7/9/10 Ken Seto
7/9/10 eric gisse
7/10/10 colp
7/4/10 PD
6/29/10 colp
6/29/10 Androcles
7/3/10 PD
7/10/10 harald
7/10/10 PD
7/10/10 PD
7/3/10 Koobee Wublee
7/4/10 hanson
7/4/10 whoever
7/6/10 Koobee Wublee
7/6/10 Peter Webb
7/7/10 hanson
7/5/10 colp
7/5/10 whoever
7/5/10 eric gisse
7/11/10 harald
7/11/10 Daryl McCullough
7/12/10 harald
7/12/10 Daryl McCullough
6/29/10 PD
7/3/10 colp
7/4/10 whoever
7/4/10 Cosmik Debris
7/4/10 Androcles
7/10/10 colp
7/11/10 Ken Seto
7/6/10 PD
6/30/10 colp
6/30/10 whoever
7/4/10 PD
7/11/10 PD
7/7/10 colp
6/30/10 PD
7/3/10 harald
7/3/10 Daryl McCullough
7/3/10 harald
7/4/10 Daryl McCullough
7/4/10 eric gisse
7/4/10 artful
7/4/10 Ken Seto
7/4/10 harald
7/4/10 Androcles
7/4/10 Daryl McCullough
7/4/10 Daryl McCullough
7/4/10 Aetherist
7/4/10 Y.Porat
7/4/10 harald
7/4/10 Daryl McCullough
7/5/10 colp
7/5/10 whoever
7/5/10 colp
7/11/10 colp
7/11/10 Ken Seto
7/5/10 Koobee Wublee
7/5/10 harald
7/5/10 Daryl McCullough
7/5/10 harald
7/5/10 Daryl McCullough
7/5/10 harald
7/5/10 Daryl McCullough
7/5/10 Daryl McCullough
7/5/10 harald
7/5/10 Aetherist
7/5/10 eric gisse
7/5/10 hanson
7/6/10 harald
7/6/10 harald
7/6/10 Daryl McCullough
7/6/10 Aetherist
7/6/10 Aetherist
7/7/10 harald
7/7/10 harald
7/6/10 harald
7/6/10 Daryl McCullough
7/7/10 harald
7/7/10 Daryl McCullough
7/7/10 Tom Roberts
7/7/10 Daryl McCullough
7/8/10 Tom Roberts
7/7/10 harald
7/7/10 Daryl McCullough
7/7/10 harald
7/7/10 Daryl McCullough
7/7/10 colp
7/7/10 Androcles
7/7/10 whoever
7/7/10 J. Clarke
7/7/10 colp
7/7/10 artful
7/7/10 J. Clarke
7/7/10 colp
7/7/10 eric gisse
7/8/10 harald
7/7/10 PD
7/8/10 harald
7/8/10 Daryl McCullough
7/8/10 harald
7/8/10 Edward Green
7/8/10 Daryl McCullough
6/30/10 colp
7/5/10 artful
7/6/10 PD
7/12/10 PD
7/7/10 colp
7/7/10 whoever
7/7/10 eric gisse
6/30/10 artful
6/30/10 Daryl McCullough
7/6/10 colp
6/30/10 artful
7/1/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 whoever
7/1/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 harald
7/1/10 Androcles
7/1/10 PD
6/30/10 Koobee Wublee
6/30/10 whoever
7/1/10 eric gisse
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/6/10 PD
7/1/10 colp
7/1/10 colp
7/1/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 whoever
7/1/10 PD
7/1/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 PD
7/1/10 eric gisse
7/1/10 harald
7/1/10 Koobee Wublee
7/1/10 artful
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/2/10 artful
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/2/10 artful
7/2/10 harald
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/2/10 PD
7/2/10 Koobee Wublee
7/2/10 PD
7/2/10 harald
7/3/10 Daryl McCullough
7/1/10 artful
7/1/10 PD
7/8/10 PD
7/3/10 colp
7/1/10 colp
7/7/10 colp
7/1/10 harald
7/1/10 Androcles
7/1/10 harald
7/1/10 Androcles
7/1/10 artful
7/1/10 artful
7/2/10 harald
7/2/10 PD
7/1/10 colp
7/3/10 PD
7/6/10 Koobee Wublee
7/6/10 Peter Webb