Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fdn.fr!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <2ldFZcWUiypv1AABXgpIlSANkiI@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: A discussion of 'Tachyons, the 4-momentum ...'
References: <7b7801803ba85c52030404bcf149487d@www.novabbs.com> <428875ea108f76fa154169b3e097aa39@www.novabbs.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: dKVS-HEshWgpjDVhhZ-HD_tqYAE
JNTP-ThreadID: 7b7801803ba85c52030404bcf149487d@www.novabbs.com
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=2ldFZcWUiypv1AABXgpIlSANkiI@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 24 18:57:36 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-10-05T18:57:36Z/9049488"; posting-account="4@nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="julien.arlandis@gmail.com"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: Richard Hachel <r.hachel@liscati.fr.invalid>
Bytes: 4554
Lines: 79

Le 05/10/2024 à 20:35, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> This scenario is described as Method II, which demonstrates
> that RoS limits the ability to complete a closed message
> loop that violates causality.  There are some that still
> can't understand the logic, so let's look at Method I.
> 
> Method I shows that E = mc^2/sqrt(u^2/c^ - 1) for tachyons,
> where the tachyon mass is im and u is the tachyon velocity
> in frame S.  The valid range of u is split: -\infty < u < -c
> and c < u < \infty.  It is VERY important to note that
> E NEVER becomes negative for ANY valid value of u.
> 
> By the Principle of Relativity, the tachyon velocity in frame
> S' is E' = mc^2/sqrt(u'^2/c^2 - 1), where u' has the same
> range as in S.  E' may be derived from the E equation by the
> relativistic velocity composition equation (RVCE):
> 
> u' = (u - v)/(1 - uv/c^2)
> 
> This is just as valid as the Lorentz tranformation equations.
> Applying this,
> 
> E = mc^2 sqrt[(1 - uv/c^2)^2]/sqrt(u^2/c^2 - 1)
> 
> Conventional physicists have made an error at this point which
> isn't wrong unless 1 - uv/c^2 < 0.  When they do this, they
> proclaim that E becomes negative, which E NEVER does throughout
> the whole valid range for u, as demonstrated above!
> 
> This should alert any thoughtful physicist that the RCVE has
> a limited domain of applicability.  This must mean that the
> LT also has the same limitation.
> 
> Those that assert that Method II can violate causality do so
> by working in the region where 1 - uv/c^2 is negative, which
> is outside of the applicability range of the LT.  They have
> no foundation for their assertions.

We should start by understanding the theory of relativity.
I have been denouncing the problem for 40 years. "YOU do not understand 
the words you pronounce, and you stupidly apply equations whose meaning 
you do not understand".

When I pose v=x/t, I understand what I am saying.

When I say x=(1/2)at² I understand what I am saying.

I visualize my mathematical thought in a physical thought.

I understand things.

Physicists, too, obviously. They are not thugs, or bandits.

But if I ask them to visualize in their minds the Lorentz transformations, 
or To=(x/c).sqrt(1+2c²/ax),
they are incapable of "thinking of something physical", and there are only 
formulas learned by heart, but without any idea in the mind of what it 
represents in the real universe.

We should start by putting words to the ideas, and if possible, to clear 
ideas.

Dilation of internal chonotropies: Richard Hachel understands.

Dilation of times by change of reference frame: I do not understand.

"If two mobiles, one in Galilean motion, the other in uniformly 
accelerated motion starting at rest, travel in the same observable time an 
identical distance, their proper times will be equal": Richard Hachel 
confirms.

The proper times will differ: false and of no interest, I do not 
understand.

There are many things I do not understand in RR, but rest assured, 
friends, it is not because I lack practical intelligence.

An infinite intelligence would not understand any more.

R.H.