|
|
Re: Dingle and the Twins' Paradox (Tom and Paul Andersen are wrong)
Posted:
Feb 25, 2012 10:41 PM
|
|
"Henry Wilson DSc." <..@..> wrote in message
news:5k9jk75v82pjhdp19e1mmf0hf9rvfcja9r@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 18:07:11 -0600, Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2/25/12 3:08 PM, Henry Wilson DSc. wrote:
>>> Nobody has seriously questioned Einstein's RoS or clock synch definition
>>
>>
>> Ralph Rabbidge, who is neither a Henry nor a Wilson and most
>> certainly not a DSc., has *failed to learn* about the relativity
>> of simultaneity. Take, for example, two observers in relative
>> motion to each other. Say, one on the ground and one on a
>> passing train.
>>
>> The space-time diagram makes it easy to see for which
>> observer, simultaneity holds.
>>
>> See: http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/relativity/notes/section09.html
>>
>> Here's the thought problem:
>> http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/relativity/notes/lightbulb.gif
>>
>> Here's the analysis via space-time diagram:
>> http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/relativity/notes/lightbulb-STD.gif
>>
>> Events that seem to have happened at the same time for the observer
>> on train do not happen at the same time for the observer on the
>> ground. The concept of before and after actually depends on the
>> observer.
>
> Of course they fucking don't....that's just an Einsteinian red herring.
>
> Simultaneity has nothing to do with what humans SEE.
>
> Here's the simple truth about the bogus RoS:
>
> www.scisite.info/ros.html
That's a crank site. It doesn't even vaguely resemble a scientific argument.
> www.scisite.info/clocksynch.exe
>
You want us to download and run an executable program? And this somehow
explains Relativity? I doubt that you will get too many takers on that, and
I am certainly not one of them.
You need to use sites which were done by people who understand basic
physics. Crank sites will not help you at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity
is as good a place as any to start.
|
|
