On Jul 2, 2:49 am, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote: > On Jul 1, 9:33 pm, harald <h...@swissonline.ch> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 1, 12:47 am, colp <c...@solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > > On Jul 1, 4:30 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > [..] > > > > <quote> > > > > > > At best, all you've done is show the > > > > > fallacies or assumptions inherent in COLP's Oversimplified Relativity. > > > > What specific fallacies or assumptions? Quotes, please. > > > > Sure. You've used the statement from COLP's Oversimplified Relativity > > > that moving clocks run slow (which you've said is true even for blue- > > > shifted clocks), and you've used the statement that COLP's > > > Oversimplified Relativity makes no provision whatsoever for a > > > compression of time for a clock turning around. This immediately leads > > > to several paradoxes, and this is ample reason to chuck Colp's > > > Oversimplified Relativity. > > > </quote> > > > > The statement that "moving clocks run slow" isn't an > > > oversimplification, it is directly inferred from Einstein's > > > "Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies". > > > > Also, Einstein's paper makes no provision whatsoever for the > > > compression of time for a clock turning around. > > > Einstein's paper explains that clock rate (as measured with an > > inertial coordinate system) must be the same at the same speed, > > independent of the direction of motion of the clock. Is that what > > you mean? > > Yes, in part. According to SR a moving clock will appear to run slower > both when it is moving away and when it is approaching, since velocity > is squared in the transform.
That is only a 1-D mathematical argument. Einstein used perhaps more mathematical shortcuts than Lorentz, but just as Lorentz his arguments were foremost *physical*. As Einstein put it:
"The laws by which the *states of physical systems undergo change* are not affected, whether these changes of state be referred to the one or the other of two systems of co-ordinates in uniform translatory motion." (emphasis mine).
He concluded that, according to measurements with an inertial reference system, a relative to that system moving clock will run slow by the Lorentz factor. Obviously that conclusion cannot depend on direction.
Those are paradoxes of GRT, see my parallel comment.
> > Different people perceive different paradoxes, but > > they are all easy to explain; and probably the thinking error that you > > fell for was already explained to you, but you either overlooked or > > misunderstood it. > > No, that is not the case.