Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: A short proof of the inconsistency of The Shit
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 17:56:30 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <afa7609a0e7b5f7d66e1e874b551ccfb@www.novabbs.com>
References: <17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com> <b1b968956f794d0e91a151e2c1647f4b@www.novabbs.com> <17ee1be73899ea88$501522$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3496427"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="p+/k+WRPC4XqxRx3JUZcWF5fRnK/u/hzv6aL21GRPZM";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$yrXnC/dz7bTwClZyA5nO4uoRBg0ghE00Gee6xKQrEeC4d7HKTq9Jy
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 47dad9ee83da8658a9a980eb24d2d25075d9b155
Bytes: 3045
Lines: 59

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.

> as expected from a relativistic idiot in
> general and from Harrie especially,

And proof that Wozniak is the one who slanders
and insults.

> one observer present here, a moving (wrt
> Solar System) one.

Nope.  The moving observer doesn't see two
different results.  There is the moving observer
who sees the 99766 seconds AND the the one on
earth standing right beside the clock who sees
the 86400 seconds (Of course, neither actually
watches for a year, Duh!)

The definition was created by an observer and
that's the way the earth clocks are set.  It
takes an observer on earth to confirm that.
This is the only rational way to look at it.

“To argue with a person who has renounced the
use of reason is like administering medicine
to the dead.” – Thomas Paine