Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Space and spacetime Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 01:50:38 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: <57daee8da23d6ae5103795e3c9012685@www.novabbs.com> References: <972e62f21cba1316f2184b61c6a0c401@www.novabbs.com> <17da9b4080dd35af$266525$441546$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <17dab8b50a072746$163214$431754$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <17dabca9290af769$189571$436234$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <93708b1befdea8fb7c18da1b3d12630d@www.novabbs.com> <17dac4a0a98761ea$266527$441546$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <9ae2e2bf5f37a77b3e1bd160981c6fd5@www.novabbs.com> <17db1164fde32607$208349$436234$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <392fcd2a13fa911f8f6d5182fb485f7b@www.novabbs.com> <17db1a8a53f81f54$288216$441546$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <766d95371391c171627beb10f0e1ae9c@www.novabbs.com> <17db25828bda4e92$4$479221$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="762590"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="p+/k+WRPC4XqxRx3JUZcWF5fRnK/u/hzv6aL21GRPZM"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$avfhLX/kquYmWSHc7ZMXleJn9daxHSh2YLU8Fg6WDYWg/F.ji7dB2 X-Rslight-Posting-User: 47dad9ee83da8658a9a980eb24d2d25075d9b155 Bytes: 5829 Lines: 120 Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > W dniu 21.06.2024 o 23:46, gharnagel pisze: > > > > Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > > > W dniu 21.06.2024 o 20:21, gharnagel pisze: > > > > > > > > An autistic "information engineer" who can't understand > > > > metaphor gets really asinine when his fuzzy-thinking is > > > > > > A fanatic piece of lying ship, caught on an > > > impudent, obvious  lie is screaming about a > > > "metaphor". > > > > So Mad Maciej doesn't understand metaphor. > > Why won't you explain, you lying shit. > And why won't you stop dodging and > demonstrate the power of predictions > of your moronic Shit on my example. I'm not dodging. I'm merely asking consequential question which Woozie-liar refuses to answer. > > > Why won't you stop dodging and answer - what is the predicttion > > > of the observer in my example according to the physics of your > > > idiot guru? > > > > First the autistic information engineer must define his terms. > > Must he? It is incumbant on him since he is the one demanding an answer to his devious and misleading problem. > But what does the relativistic piece of > shit mean by "define"? By "must"? By > "terms"? I just want everything clearly and honestly laid out. Of course, that's too much to ask from a dishonest hypocrite. > > > Let's get to the point, sure. Is the RELATIVISTIC formula of > velocity > > > adding  a part of Lorentz's ETHER theory? > > > Yes or no, trash. > > > > First of all, no human being is trash, so Weird Wozzy doesn't really > > want an honest answer, which I already gave to him anyway: > > > > "[Heinlein] also said that deriving something was just finding out > > what you already knew.  Meaning, of course, that it was all there > > in the original equations, implied, which is the case with > relativistic > > velocity addition. > > So, according to you and your idiot gurus - > in LET every observer, stationary in ether or not - > would observe light moving at speed c. Right? What's the matter, mathematically-incompetent Wozzie, can't actually USE the theory and calculate the answer for yourself? > > As anyone would know if he weren't mathematically > > incompetent." > > > > Because of Wozzie's mathematical incompetence, he can't figure out > that > > (1) relativistic velocity addition is DERIVED from the Lorentz > > transform equations. > It is, sure, after assuming the obviously correct > Holiest Postulate. The postulates were determined FIRST, dishonest Wozzie-fool, and THEN the LT equations were derived. > And speaking of mathematics - it's always > good to remind that your bunch of idiots > had to announce its oldest part false, as > it didn't want to fit the madness of your > insane guru. Irrelevant and false baloney seeking to deflect from the drubbing Wozzie's but is getting in these "discussions." > > (2) "Lorentz's ETHER theory" has NOTHING to do with it because there > is > > no ether*.  So LET is a dead end.  Dishonest Wozzie's attempt to > insert > > that into his question was a red herring, a misleading fallacy. > > (3) The RVA equation is derived from the LT equations by dividing the > > equation for dx' by the equation for dt', so there is no "adding" to > > either LET or SR. > > > > *Ether theory is a dead end because SR took away the last vestige of > > any physicality: that of motion.  IOW, it becomes fundamentally > > undetectable, which makes it nonexistent for all practical purposes. > > And how about 0 meridian? Is it fundamentally > detectable? More attempted deflection. The eath has nothing to do with either LET or SR. > If it is not - it must be nonexistent for all practical purposes. > Am I correct, Harrie, poor halfbrain? It is part of a coordinate system. Coordinate systems aren't part of nature. They are human mental constructs. But this is another stupid attempt to deflect from Wozzie-filth having to face the drubbing he's getting. His parents didn't do their job of raising an honest and responsible human, so he has to take his whuppin' now.