Path: ...!local-3.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 02:54:40 +0000
Subject: Re: Langevin traveler and simultaneity.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <Wa9w3Wa_pYh2RfoV8OhSZOEKzig@jntp>
 <m7OdnWPyZotyYGj7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <5acyt35ufD_JOsFm569ZOhEfuPY@jntp>
 <TeqcnUg1bu9QhWv7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 19:54:50 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <TeqcnUg1bu9QhWv7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <NEKdnU1N4aztg2v7nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 80
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-7OWFvB9BLu1YBXXTe58MVwSVEg+SxuuFPbTL8IrFxJVoqxCSO/yUVbPcaAqcnqagj5OzuAmBn1f8zdN!FyxMK6EXGDwLC57Jj9RLEfBsYkiIO1kKLleIVKrEOl4/xcWpxeaKOzzbXGCqlDtuVJZmaqjhnQ==
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 4324

On 09/26/2024 07:30 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> On 09/26/2024 06:23 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>> Le 27/09/2024 à 02:35, Ross Finlayson a écrit :
>>> On 09/26/2024 03:34 PM, Richard Hachel wrote:
>>
>>> You mean Terrell?
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrell_rotation
>>
>> This is unfortunately very poor work.
>>
>> R.H.
>>
>
> That's funny, I can barely scratch two dimes together.
>
> Luckily though Uncle Abe's on both sides of the money,
> coins and bills, or, you know, while pennies circulate.
> It's usually good to have your face on the money, usually.
>
>
> The numbers one would expect are naturally _very_ frugal,
> what with regards to the give-and-take of the dimensional
> analysis, also always provide exact change.
>
>
> Now, besides as taking a perceived slight as a chance to
> crow a bit, then, perhaps instead you intended Terrell,
> or, it's kind of like that one fellow "physics is broken",
> and it's like, "is it perhaps, est-ce que peut-etre ainsi,
> that you have a better one?", and when it's like, "physics
> is broken", then it's like, "no thanks, I don't want
> another broken physics, the one we have is pretty well understood".
>
>
> Besides, it's pretty clear that actual development, progress
> in physics, requires actual development, progress in mathematics,
> thus to improve the mathematical model to thusly equip the
> physical model, what otherwise is sort of inflexible,
> the usual development and its usual derivations.
>
>
> Then, Terrell rotation, has that Terrell rotation is also
> considered _outside_ of just special relativity, Terrell
> has some things going on in "relativistic dynamics". Then,
> the write-up there is pretty much "we got extra credit
> for saying Special Relativity twice", that I'd agree it's
> more the reference to the wider surrounds, like the,
> FLRW metric and this kind of thing?, including Terrell,
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedmann%E2%80%93Lema%C3%AEtre%E2%80%93Robertson%E2%80%93Walker_metric
>
>
> ... that Terrell: also writes in _General_ Relativity.
>
>
> Then, if you make it so that there's that "the Galilean _is_
> Lorentzian for the linear and furthermore starts bringing
> space along in the frame", while "the rotational is Lorentzian
> and observes specially the mass/energy equivalency", helping
> sort out those are two different things, both gives what
> appears to be clock skews, and, explains how clock skews
> occur in the gravitational wave, and, always has forward time,
> then your co-moving travellers you could notice would add
> back up as with regards to a clock hypothesis.
>
>
> I.e., the goal is not so much to contrive a paradox,
> as to contrive how there aren't any more.
>
> Nobody's got much use for a paradox.
>
>

I suppose one can always invoke Zeno and point out
that naive inference arrives at nothing going,
to help illustrate that breaking physics is easy:
it's fixing it that's hard.