Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 16:54:59 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Langevin's paradox again
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <FER4K03RCuXsBiIlfVNSgR0vilQ@jntp> <FlDiO.56506$GVTf.837@fx01.ams4> <lf40ddFdu9kU3@mid.individual.net> <Qjq15Muw8aIiGRVOKV0Bu2oT9_k@jntp>
Content-Language: pl
From: Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
In-Reply-To: <Qjq15Muw8aIiGRVOKV0Bu2oT9_k@jntp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 67
Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 14:54:58 +0000
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17e093318d04c44e$453$506977$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
X-Received-Bytes: 3300
Bytes: 3427

W dniu 09.07.2024 o 15:47, Richard Hachel pisze:
> Le 09/07/2024 à 07:33, Thomas Heger a écrit :
>> Am Sonntag000007, 07.07.2024 um 23:05 schrieb Paul B. Andersen:
>>> Den 04.07.2024 15:30, skrev Richard Hachel:
>>>> Langevin's paradox.
>>>> The Langevin paradox is a very serious criticism against the theory 
>>>> of relativity.
>>>
>>> Langvin's paradox is another name of the "twin paradox".
>>> In 1911 Langevin gave an example of said "paradox".
>>> He showed that the twins' would age differently.
>>> This was nothing new, Einstein gave an example of it
>>> in his 1905 paper, but he only mentioned the phenomenon
>>> without numbers. But Langevin gave an example where
>>> the "travelling twin" was moving at the speed 0.99995c
>>> (γ = 100) which made the "travelling twin" age 2 years
>>> while the "home twin" aged 200 years.
>>
>> I have tried to read Langvin's paper.
>>
>> But I actually failed to understand his arguments.
>>
>> It is based on rotations of zylinders and applying a Lorentz 
>> transformation to some effects.
>>
>> But actally I think, he made the same errors as Einstein did, because 
>> he assumed, that the journey of the travelling twin is made at 
>> constant velocity and that the effect would be the same for -v as for v.
>>
>> Both assumptions are wrong.
>>
>> Obviously wrong is constant velocity with a significant fraction of c.
>>
>> Langvin actually spoke of 'shot'.
>>
>> But that is blatant nonsense, since it would require accelerations 
>> strong enough to disintegrate the atoms of the traveling twin.
>>
>> Also ' v=-v' is total nonsense, especially if something similar to 
>> optical effects or similar to the Doppler effect are considered.
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>> Neither Einstein nor Langevin thought that this falsified SR.
>>
>> Nor do I.
>>
>>
>> The twin paradox is nosense nevertheless.
>>
>> TH
> 
> Gentlemen, gentlemen, I beg you to stop talking nonsense.
> First, Langevin's paradox does not consist of saying that the two will 
> not be the same age, it is not a paradox.


It is. Apart of mumbling inconsistently -
the idiot didn't understand what yhe
human age is, how it is determined and
that clocks have nothing in common with
that.
Of course, an age of a human is determined
by subtracting his birthdate from the
current date. It always was.