On Jan 10, 10:07 am, Mahipal <mahipal7...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 3, 6:07 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote: > > paul andersen wrote:
> > ?Given two hypotheses where each is an antithesis to and thus > > invalidates the other, common sense says one must find experiments to > > validate only one of these hypotheses.? > > KW, you can never teach the willfully blind to see a rainbow.
You are very correct. The little professor from Norway, paul andersen, thought that was a fumble and urged the sperm lover to haul it away. <shrug>
> > The exact episode is like the children?s story ?Blind men and the > > elephant?. Apparently, paul is too busy chasing chickens near the > > Arctic Circle that he lost the meaning of what scientific method is. > > Gee! You can even take hints from children?s story books. > > Ahahahaha... > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_the_Elephant
> > > Your argument are as lethal as always. > > > You bet. <shrug> > > Only an idiot would write what Paul did.
Now, you are getting the picture of how shallow-minded this person is. <shrug>
> > > For example, you proved me wrong when I in this paper: > > >http://www.gethome.no/paulba/pdf/LTconsistent.pdf > > > thought it was possible to set three clocks to zero > > > at the instant when they were co-located: > > >http://tinyurl.com/34dv5p8 > > > On page 3 right below Figure 2, you have > > > delta = (delta_A ? blah blah blah) / sqrt(1 ? B^2) > > > Where > > > ** B^2 = v^2 / c^2 > > That's my favorite equation of all time! Just love it.
It is full of mathematical contradictions if one is smart enough to see where they are. <shrug>
> > It can easily be > > > Delta_A = (delta ? blah blah blah) / sqrt(1 ? B^2) > > > The bottom line is the equation describing the segment of Minkowski > > spacetime using your labeling system: > > > ** c^2 dt_AC^2 ? ds_AC^2 = c^2 dt_BC^2 ? ds_BC^2 > > > Where > > > ** ds^2 = dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 > > > The equation can be written as follows. > > > ** dt_AC^2 (1 ? B_AC^2) = dt_BC^2 (1 ? B_BC^2) > > > Where > > > ** B_AC c = Speed of C as observed by A > > ** B_BC c = Speed of C as observed by B > > > From A?s point of view trying to compare the rate of time flows with > > C, B and C are the same. Thus, the equation above simplifies into the > > following. > > > ** dt_AB^2 (1 ? B_AB^2) = dt_BB^2 (1 ? B_BB^2) = dt_BB^2 > > > Where > > > ** B_AB c = Speed of B as observed by A > > ** B_BB c = 0 > > > On the other hand, from C?s pint of view observing A, B and A are the > > same. Thus, the spacetime equation has to be interpreted differently > > as the following. > > > ** dt_AA^2 (1 ? B_AA^2) = dt_BA^2 (1 ? B_BA^2) = dt_AA^2 > > > Where > > > ** B_AA c = 0 > > ** B_BA c = Speed of A as observed by B > > > The only time when there is no paradox is when (B_AB = B_BA = 0). > > This is what the Lorentz symmetry is all about such that there is no > > special treatment on the one that is moving, and the little professor > > from Norway fails miserably on this one. <SPANK> <SPANK> <SPANK> > > > It is time for paul to join another paul aka sylvia, absolute dick, > > little bitch, etc. better known as PD for another divine vision to > > resolve the paradox --- projection of proper time. Tom used to > > believe in that crap, but he is now back to the first divine vision > > promoted by promoted by Olivia Newton-John?s grandfather, Max Born. > > <shrug> > > Nice connection! ONJ and Born. "Have you never been mellow, have you > never tried, to find the comfort, from inside..." try Dan Singh with > QT's VV of Travolta fame. Sorry, I had one of those greasy free > thought moments.
Have you seen Koobee Wublee?s Relativity Play where Born was singing that same song?