Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <O-L1WgU1eCsz14Wrc6D7tpNPV7s@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Relativistic aberration
References: <QsysQnpetTSlB_zDsjAhnCKqnbg@jntp> <lgtntqFjg34U1@mid.individual.net>
 <17e7331a73814274$123023$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <v8cgia$1e4s9$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: ikhiDCuB-TIQ5L89oKG2FHYbizI
JNTP-ThreadID: XgGFOrcTXd5ZDEX07aa-LTy0U04
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=O-L1WgU1eCsz14Wrc6D7tpNPV7s@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 24 15:10:08 +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="2024-07-31T15:10:08Z/8970602"; 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@wanadou.fr>
Bytes: 3697
Lines: 51

Le 31/07/2024 à 07:03, Python a écrit :
> 
> Oh, anything build later is bad, "abstract" (the same word Hachel uses
> when he cease to believe he understand something), as an "information
> engineer" you have issues with abstractions too?
> 
> It looks to any sane person (neither you nor Hachel) can recognize that
> from Newtonian physics to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics just ran fine
> anyway :-)

I'm not sure that everything went so well.

It started with the equations of H.A. Lorentz, real complex and wrong 
blocks to find the right transformations.

If Poincaré, the greatest mathematician in the world in 1905, who was not 
Breton, HIM, had not helped him, he would still be there.

When the RR came out, 100 scientists proposed a manifesto, arguing that it 
was not all clear, and that there was obvious bullshit, and poorly 
explained. In particular the Langevin paradox which has NEVER been 
correctly explained, except by Richard Hachel and more than a hundred 
years after Poincaré.

And today, while I propose a new approach to the problem, men spit in my 
face more than they themselves know how to explain a small Poincaré 
transformation with a small numerical example.
It is absolutely fantastic to weigh human stupidity with a good scale.

Simple example, you, O Moron who shows off to me, but you are not even 
capable of understanding what an apparent speed is in astrophysics, and I 
had to explain to you for three months, why we could set Vapp = Vo / (1 + 
cosµ.Vo / c).

And I will have to spend twenty years (but I would be dead before), to 
explain to you a small TL: a star has just collapsed on itself over there 
15,000 light years away. I start my stopwatch in front of the celestial 
event that I SEE. A rocket that is crossing the solar system at that 
moment also sees it (tautology).
Assuming that I set (x,y,z,To,t) in Hachel notation, without even needing 
to explain, it is so obvious, if I write E=(12000,9000,0,-15000,0) for me.
What will he, the rocket commander, have to write?
E=( )
But you're not even capable, hey, buffoon!
What are you coming to annoy Sylvia and Maciej?
The worst, if it turns out Sylvia, who is a woman will answer better than 
you.
You should be ashamed.

No, no, my dear, it didn't go "that well".

R.H.