Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 06:27:34 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of The Shit
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <b1b968956f794d0e91a151e2c1647f4b@www.novabbs.com> <17ee1be73899ea88$501522$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <afa7609a0e7b5f7d66e1e874b551ccfb@www.novabbs.com> <17ee20164a89a38e$476327$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <9580dde8354474f0770030f927756491@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: pl
From: Maciej Wozniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl>
In-Reply-To: <9580dde8354474f0770030f927756491@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 56
Path: ...!news-out.netnews.com!s1-1.netnews.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.eu1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 04:27:32 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 2802
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17ee4111f31b308b$545571$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 3146

W dniu 23.08.2024 o 01:31, gharnagel pisze:
> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 18:23:07 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>
>> W dniu 22.08.2024 o 19:56, gharnagel pisze:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:06:27 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>> > >
>> > > W dniu 22.08.2024 o 18:47, gharnagel pisze:
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2024 15:12:33 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
>> > > > > As seen, the definition of second loved so
>> > > > > much to be invoked by relativistic morons -
>> > > >
>> > > > Proof here that Wozniak is the one who slanders.
>> > > >
>> > > > > wasn't valid in the time when their idiot guru
>> > > > > lived and mumbled. Up to 1960 it was ordinary
>> > > > > 1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt
>> > > > > solar system is measuring the length
>> > > > > of solar day. What is the result predicted
>> > > > > by the Einsteinian physics?
>> > > > > One prediction is - 99766. From the
>> > > > > postulates. The second prediction is -
>> > > > > 86400. From definition.
>> > > > > And similiarly with the prediction of
>> > > > > a measurement of a meridian.
>> > > >
>> > > > Is this supposed to be Wozniak's so-called
>> > > > "proof" that relativity is "inconsistent?
>> > > > Wozniak conflates a moving observer with a
>> > > > stationary observer
>> > >
>> > > A lie,
>> >
>> > No, it's not a lie.  Wozniak is projecting his
>> > own dishonesty.
>>
>> Yes, it is. There is just one observer in the
>> example.
> 
> If there's only one observer, then there is no
> observation of two intervals of time. 


Sure there is no observation. Like usually
in a gedanken.
There are still 2 denying themself predictions
of observation derivable in the physics of your
idiot guru. That's because the moronic mumble
of your  idiot guru was not even consistent.