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: Electron size, shape and spin.Confusion and conflicts with Einstein's
 1905 SR.
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2025 21:42:44 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <d38ac7fb8de3a1e3c8f08908a6e1953a@www.novabbs.com>
References: <8d05bbe123c740f2934b31e367a92231@www.novabbs.com> <65006a73bc196736fbec3d54e21fa717@www.novabbs.com> <vr9tmf$q4vi$1@dont-email.me> <0c0b2bb49434e61879858abed2b9d6c2@www.novabbs.com> <vrbtgj$2k1q7$1@dont-email.me> <a1b3bbfca4b1e9797d98903a77f0cf59@www.novabbs.com> <f58a6ba75e73908078c5576f74ffe329@www.novabbs.com> <9ed9e92086e0d99fde7d81edfced643a@www.novabbs.com> <0082c223a6c8e6952b11ec32b83c473b@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="764711"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="TRF929uvrTGZYJLF+N3tVBXNVfr/PeoSjsJ9hd5hWzo";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$9sehuKuOclSTuTfA.ALW5OzIRFLl0tkEDK0UCKp0jm8prd/EGX9j6
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cefb4c33981645a229d345bae7bb8942e6b32c35
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 7431
Lines: 148

On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 20:25:49 +0000, rhertz wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 19:31:31 +0000, gharnagel wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 17:13:45 +0000, rhertz wrote:
> > >
> > > LIKE ITS LENGTH, TIME LAPSES, MASS? OF COURSE NOT, IMBECILE. AND
> THIS IS
> > > WHY I WROTE THAT YOUR COMMENT IS BEYOND IDIOCY.
> >
> > It made perfect sense to me.
> >
> > > ANOTHER IDIOTIC COMMENT: YOU CAN'T MEASURE REMOTELY WHAT HAPPENS ON
> THE
> > > FRAME THAT'S MOVING WRT THE OBSERVER AT RELATIVE REST.
> >
> > Funny, I thought it's being done all the time on drones and space
> > probes.
> >
> > > IT'S JUST WHAT A COUPLE OF EQUATIONS TELL YOU THAT YOU MUST PERCEIVE
> > > SUCH NON-SENSE.
> >
> > The equations help us to understand what is being measured.  And Paul
> > points out that a 1.000 GHz signal generated by a moving observer is
> > received at 1.001 GHz.  This is explained quite easily by the Doppler
> > equation (the RELATIVISTIC version if the stationary observer wants a
> > really, really accurate measurement).
> >
> > > THAT'S WHY RELATIVITY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE, DEVELOPED FOR ASSHOLES
> LIKE
> > > YOU SO YOU CAN PLAY WITH THIS SHIT AS A HOBBY FOR MORE THAN 30
> YEARS,
> > > ONLINE.
> >
> > Paul, you're right.  Hertz can't get through a post without profanity
> > :-)
> >
> > > OBVIOUS IN YOUR DEFORMED, INDOCTRINATED MIND. WHICH OTHER
> > > PSEUDOSCIENCE/CULT DO YOU SUPPORT? I BET THAT RELATIVITY IS ONE OF
> MANY
> > > IN YOUR FRAGILE, GULLIBLE MIND.
> >
> > Hertz seems to be the one with a deformed self-indoctrinated mind
> > (that's the worst kind).
> >
> > > MORE BULLSHIT NOT WORTHY TO COMMENT.
> >
> > You mean like Paul's explanation of a 1.000 GHz signal sent from a
> > moving observer being received at 1.001 GHz?  No wonder Hertz wants
> > to forget about that little gem that destroys his whole diatribe.
> >  And with a name like, HERTZ, too :-)
>
> Of course that you support Paul's shit (profanity here).

I only support what I have determined the way the world actually works.
I do this by studying EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE and adjusting my belief
system to agree with that, rather then having a frozen belief system
like certain people in this "discussion" group.

"Try being informed instead of just opinionated." -- Anon.

> Also support the widely published daily delay of (45-7) usec that
> comes from Schwarzschild applied to GPS. You HAVE TO, BECAUSE YOUR
> CULT OBLIGES YOU AND CRITICIZING THE SHIT IS PUNISHED WITH "MORTE
> CIVILE" IN YOUR PAGAN CHURCH.

I support it because it has been measured:

"At the time of launch of the first NTS-2 satellite (June 1977), which
contained the first Cesium clock to be placed in orbit, there were some
who doubted that relativistic effects were real. [Like certain reality-
deniers who frequent this group]  A frequency synthesizer was built
into the satellite clock system so that after launch, if in fact the
rate of the clock in its final orbit was that predicted by GR, then the
synthesizer could be turned on bringing the clock to the coordinate
rate necessary for operation. The atomic clock was first operated for
about 20 days to measure its clock rate before turning on the synthe-
sizer. The frequency measured during that interval was +442.5 parts
in 10^12 faster than clocks on the ground; if left uncorrected this
would have resulted in timing errors of about 38,000 nanoseconds per
day." -- Neil Ashby
http://www.leapsecond.com/history/Ashby-Relativity.htm

> Not even one fucking single time the change in frequency has been
> measured,

Denial of reality is a mental disorder.

> because it is PERCEPTUAL, and Lorentz transforms force you to
> accept a MATHEMATICAL outcome. Not a physical reality, just a
> MATHEMATICAL result.

"It is surely harmful to souls to make it a heresy to believe what is
> proved." -- Galileo Galilei

> But mathematics is not physics,

This is true.  Mathematics is a tool, not a straitjacket.

> and this can be shown also within QM.

“It is safe to say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.”
 -- Richard Feynman

> Read my post above about THE PERCEPTION of what one electron is, because
> Schrödinger wrote a beautiful equation making electrons behave as WAVES.

You don't seem to understand physics at all, even after having had it
explained to you many times before.  There are more than one type of
physicist.  One type makes measurements of reality and another makes
models
that agree with reality - at least up to a point.  The Schrödinger
equation
is such a model.  It explains A LOT, but not everything.

> Why don't you study Heisenberg's Matrix Mechanics, where there are no
> waves to describe electron orbitals?

It's a different model of reality which has been shown to be equivalent
to the wave equation.

> Of course you can't, because you know shit about matrixes,

You are wrong, young padawan learner.  I studied the matrix approach a
bit years ago.  It's less intuitive than wave mechanics, but it's
necessary to just "shut up and calculate" with either.  Your intuition
is probably wrong, anyway.

“If you are not completely confused by quantum mechanics,
you do not understand it.” -- John Wheeler

> as 99.99% of the physicists of that epoch, who were more "comfy" with
> waves.

Just goes to show that there's always more than one way to skin a cat.
It depends on what you're more comfortable with.

Let's talk about quantum field theory.  QFT is based on special
relativity.
There have been several attempts to apply QFT to tachyons, without much
success.  The reason for this may well be because the LTEs don't work
with
tachyons.  The problem is that the velocity composition equation has a
discontinuity, a singularity, at u' = c^2/v, which places a limit on its
domain of applicability.  Really smart physicists have ignored this
point
in their haste to label tachyons as nonexistent.  If you REALLY wanted
to
chew on something with substance, you'd sink your teeth into that.