Path: ...!news.nobody.at!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <n6nnyNLQR1tXDC_uShX3k3bxE5g@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Relativistic aberration
References: <QsysQnpetTSlB_zDsjAhnCKqnbg@jntp> <v8cgia$1e4s9$1@dont-email.me> <O-L1WgU1eCsz14Wrc6D7tpNPV7s@jntp>
 <v8fkn6$23nee$1@dont-email.me> <FS7BRIsxO-_X20VxXPebSsjPIt4@jntp> <v8gpr4$2c66e$1@dont-email.me>
 <1r17YwSTuu_yFwJ8Mj7O-umZb_M@jntp> <v8jd83$2vsa3$1@dont-email.me> <aGJtGFi-pcZdeYKlbLrP7fJkFGw@jntp>
 <v8m3tk$3k7em$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: _sEbIWKIcLiK4gME4rtWNAMz5Po
JNTP-ThreadID: XgGFOrcTXd5ZDEX07aa-LTy0U04
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=n6nnyNLQR1tXDC_uShX3k3bxE5g@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 03 Aug 24 21:40:12 +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="2024-08-03T21:40:12Z/8974676"; 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: 3656
Lines: 74

Le 03/08/2024 à 22:28, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
> Since the rocket is moving along the x-axis'
> the angle velocity - (direction to star) = 37⁰,
> the RA in the rocket frame will due to aberration be 12.7⁰
> the DEC = 0.
> Since the rocket and the Earth are colocated at the time of reception,
> they will obviously receive the same light which was emitted from
> the star 15000 years ago.
> That means that the distance in the Rocket frame must be 15000 ly.
> 
> Simple geometry will give:
> x' = 15000⋅cos(12.7⁰) ly = 14633 ly
> y' = 15000⋅sin(12.7⁰) ly =  3297 ly
> z' = 0 ly
> t' = -15000/c year = -15000 year
> 
> E '= (14633 ly, 3297 ly, 0 ly, -15000 y)

 ? ? ? 

 <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?n6nnyNLQR1tXDC_uShX3k3bxE5g@jntp/Data.Media:1>

 
But what are you talking about? ? ?

You're talking nonsense!!!

Your thing IS nonsense!

How do you want the object to be at the same distance in both frames of 
reference? ? ?

All this is sad to cry and you show EXACTLY what I have been saying for 
years, namely that physicists do not understand anything at all about the 
theory of relativity, and use mathematics in a completely ridiculous and 
anarchic way!

But this is nonsense, Paul!!!

You practice a stupid rotation, and we can clearly see all the stupidity 
of the Minkowski space-time block, stupid and abstract.

PAUL, PAUL, PAUL, I beg you to understand something!

There is NO rotation, there is NO change in y, nor change in z.

Poincaré was right and his geometry is magnificent, and we must take up 
its numerical applications again.

y'=y=9ly
z'=z=0ly

This is dramatically simple.

x=12 ly
x'=40 ly

To=15 ly
To'=41ly

t'=t=0

There is a relativistic translation on the x-axis.

NOTHING MORE.

This produces a ROTATION OF THE AXIS OF VIEW, but NOT of the star!!!

But damn it, if you don't understand that, you who are one of the best 
posters of relativity, we are in a terrible mess, and we will never 
progress.

R.H.

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=n6nnyNLQR1tXDC_uShX3k3bxE5g@jntp>