Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <b4WXAi8P2nvCwUATxx84m5e52Ro@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Incorrect mathematical integration
References: <EKV4LWfwyF4mvRIpW8X1iiirzQk@jntp> <UqTpLIJxvD4VcXT01kWm7g9OGtU@jntp> <v7jnc7$7jpq$1@dont-email.me>
 <KRDL-sfeKg0KUbMuUiMzTEhYDwk@jntp> <v7mc8d$pmhs$1@dont-email.me> <9w4qQAYIGHNeJtHg4ZR1m_Ooxo4@jntp>
 <v7p7bu$1cd5m$1@dont-email.me> <oEpFQDJJhcpYoGFheTTVIKntZUE@jntp> <v7qt4k$1obhi$1@dont-email.me>
 <E7KdnZQ2kcpMMz_7nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: nVfdWERRtQCGhdExEydNA-VfTjU
JNTP-ThreadID: Ptg0buW51I-Cbbzx-mVW15r6pQg
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=b4WXAi8P2nvCwUATxx84m5e52Ro@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 24 20:30:09 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-07-25T20:30:09Z/8963882"; 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: 3407
Lines: 42

Le 25/07/2024 à 22:00, Ross Finlayson a écrit :
> 
> Yeah, you might think so, then though to equip the model
> where the frames, in the space, are space-frames and frame-spaces,
> so that the particle's _space_ besides its _frame_ are moving,
> what results that space-contraction in effect, is real, that
> the particle brings its space with it.
> 
> The linear accelerators are mostly aggregates of quite a large
> number of, abstractly, particles, as with regards to energy
> input and energy arrived.
> 
> 
> The linear accelerators, like SLAC, illustrate that space-contraction
> can be observed, affecting the surrounds of the main beam-line as
> it were, as if according to a space contraction, and indeed about
> the Galilean, inputs and outputs.
> 
> 
> In the cosmological setting, the larger body or system being
> its own rotational frame altogether, illustrating again that
> the space contraction is observable, the Lorentzian in the
> rotational, helps explain why theories like MOND have a
> physical explanation and not just an algebraic model.
> 
> I.e., MOND sort of answers why there is no dark matter,
> then there's a sort of inverse-MOND also to explain why
> there's no dark energy, that the effects otherwise are
> quite simple and holistic, instead of the "missing link"
> non-theory of non-science.

In the case you are proposing, there is no contraction of the distances, 
because the particle is heading TOWARDS its receptor.

The equation is no longer D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) and to believe this is to 
fall into the trap of ease, but D'=D.sqrt[(1+Vo/c)/ (1-Vo/c)] since 
cosµ=-1.

For the particle the distance to travel (or rather that the receiver 
travels towards it) is extraordinarily greater than in the laboratory 
reference frame.

R.H.