Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 17:35:59 +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> <17e093318d04c44e$453$506977$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <v6jjdn$1dcp9$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: pl
From: Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
In-Reply-To: <v6jjdn$1dcp9$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 86
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.endofthelinebbs.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!tr1.iad1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 15:35:58 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 3604
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17e0956e40b4ac96$539$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 4037

W dniu 09.07.2024 o 17:02, Python pisze:
> Le 09/07/2024 à 16:54, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>> 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.
> 
> *facepalm*
> 
> You stupidity is abysmal Wozniak.
> 
> When a person's age is unknown there are biological
> ways to estimate it
, you know? You really think that
> these methods are inaccurate?

You really think they are not, poor stinker?


> 
> 
>