Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Python Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Langevin's paradox again Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 02:14:00 +0200 Organization: CCCP Lines: 49 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 02:14:01 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="11923cb29fc9016b5182303cf2a03872"; logging-data="1575468"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19bkxQMj21/WYfkJANGvuqC" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:1bAPx2994HHNbuC2SnzfVgxd4vs= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3997 Le 17/07/2024 à 02:11, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit : > Le 17/07/2024 à 01:41, Python a écrit : >> Le 17/07/2024 à 00:44, Richard Hachel a écrit : > >> You contradict yourself and the principle of Relativity on your >> claims about accelerated/inertial twins. I'm not the only one >> who pointed that to you. You are insanely egotist and stupid, >> Richard. You should not be allowed to practice medicine in France >> as you currently are. > > But no my dear Jean-Pierre, > I am not contradicting myself, and indeed, after 40 years of reflection > on the subject, I have achieved total mastery of RR on all these > essential principles. > You know, my darling, everything did not fall from the sky, it took me > thousands of hours of reflection to obtain fairly good scientific bases, > and I thought I would never be able to to complete my personal mission: > to understand at least two or three important things about the universe > in its scientific, theological, philosophical whole. > It is also not excluded that I disappeared, nothing remains. > On the other hand, I have never stopped telling you, to you who is an > ugly brat who doesn't want to understand anything, it is true that the > RR contradicts itself on many things. > I have already given formal proof of this. > One of the best, incontestable proofs is the Langevin in apparent mode > which is perfectly absurd if we take the contraction of lengths at face > value, but the resolution of the problem offends human navel-gazing. > Human navel-gazing is such that if you reveal a disturbing truth to him, > he will take, if he can, millennia to challenge it. > The truth (be careful, my darling) is that there is no contraction of > distances by change of frame of reference, but on the contrary an > expansion of distances. > This is what Poincaré says in his transformation, and this explains all > the misunderstandings that have existed for 120 years. > You noticed that the quantity sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) of the transformation > of Poincaré-Lorentz is found in the denominator in > x'=(x-Vo.To)/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)? > General dilatation, my dear Watson. Lorentz factor obliges. > Which also explains the 36 al that Stella sees traveling at 4c for 9 years. > No, no, I'm not contradicting myself. > It is not the same for physicists who are still fighting among > themselves, because they have not understood the beauty, the clarity and > the evidence of the theory stripped of its conceptual dust. Because for > them again: ignorance is strength. But whose ignorance for whose strength? Richard, you need to see a psychiatrist.