Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <Ibjh1AmAa9PjZiQF-UQX-2NHlQ0@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of The Shit
References: <17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <17ef2dc9521ac81e$518524$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <cf4da5f0623e38e6ea143cc17baa3df8@www.novabbs.com>
 <17ef49d04f9ca728$637458$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <99644ad5bf4316e8ad0c33c2c88186c8@www.novabbs.com>
 <17ef4f5375487563$506650$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <6f245833fb3cc5f325c276e2d0ead734@www.novabbs.com>
 <17ef7e11220c8a88$512687$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <23cf024421e08236d5d9a53fe6ff1051@www.novabbs.com>
 <17ef9d6e3e1ef923$670188$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: MaTZgsui454MSmBh0N8zAT83LVg
JNTP-ThreadID: 17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=Ibjh1AmAa9PjZiQF-UQX-2NHlQ0@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 24 15:15:47 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-08-27T15:15:47Z/9002532"; posting-account="4@news2.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@tiscali.fr>
Bytes: 4354
Lines: 51

Le 27/08/2024 à 16:51, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> 
> No clocks were ever accelerated in any accelerator.
> It's an impudent lie believable only by fanatic idiots.
> 
> Anyway, your pathetic lies of zillions of
> experiments allegedly confirming the pathetic
> mumble of your idiot guru are completely irrelevant
> for this thread.
> 
> The thread is about the inconsistent assumptions
> of his physics and inconsistent conclusions
> derivable from it. You're too dumb to understand
> even that, but still it is.

That's right, you're absolutely right, and no clock has ever been placed 
in accelerators.
Which presents a huge experimental problem.
What must be understood, especially understood, is that I don't believe 
that a relativistic theory has ever been developed in a native and 
coherent way.
In this sense, I'm not sure that it's been done like me, with a theory 
preceding the experiment.
No, I'm not sure at all.
So I gave what I think is the right concept of ALL RR, even in areas where 
we are far from being able to verify (rotating disks, watches placed on 
accelerated objects).
What is abnormal, with me, compared to others, is that everything is said 
in advance, and in a coherent way.
Physicists, and this is very unfortunate, do not practice like that.
They start from the experiment, and try to explain the experiment 
(Michelson Morley). It is the opposite that had to be done, to build a 
complete theory, all frames of reference combined, with complete 
equations, then to check if it holds.
If already 100% of the possible experiments everything holds on 25% of the 
tested equations, and it is never found wanting, we must ask ourselves the 
right question. Is the theory entirely valid, even if it predicts strange 
things or disagrees with the other relativistic predictions. Even more so 
if it is 50%. We can then think that the 50% of tests still impossible to 
do risk being in agreement with the rest, because the bases were good.

Let's take the proper time of accelerated objects. I am sure of my move, 
because everything is of great theoretical coherence from beginning to end 
when I speak of RR. Physicists are not capable of it, but they will NEVER 
say it, they prefer to insult and try to discredit.

So yes, there are things that should be done, and we do not have the means 
to do it (unless we find a new Michelson capable of experimenting things).

But I am sure that it will go my way, and not in the t'=t way.

R.H.