Path: ...!news.misty.com!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <rDo1GVr8kc-KL3xJYnQt2YUibfs@jntp>
JNTP-Route: nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: The truth about the Lorentz Transformation.
References: <152fdece6d8ad07399662b8718f94e75@www.novabbs.com> <3fcb985b3950191bf86fb7ca9da3697a@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f6a3fbfe247560$1246842$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <457d97feb9c089a203b8afee3cfdb495@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f6a8f577078caf$1341277$505064$c2265aab@news.newsdemon.com> <d0521a59f5d23f98f5b042f53eacce5c@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f6abda1440db9b$1246843$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com> <8bd3ba49f7ac4405a8340cac09fad849@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f6f161b0e8c9f0$1247054$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: ghdqnpGklgy7hofZxymiNmUo3Ns
JNTP-ThreadID: 152fdece6d8ad07399662b8718f94e75@www.novabbs.com
JNTP-Uri: https://www.nemoweb.net/?DataID=rDo1GVr8kc-KL3xJYnQt2YUibfs@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/1.0
JNTP-OriginServer: nemoweb.net
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 24 16:52:55 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: nemoweb.net; posting-host="e8cbf2474b472b9bb79db3dccb6a856bc1d05409"; logging-data="2024-09-20T16:52:55Z/9029552"; posting-account="4@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@liscati.fr.invalid>
Bytes: 3756
Lines: 56

Le 20/09/2024 à 13:48, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> 
> So are "2+2=4"  "7x3=21", poor halfbrain.
> The topic of the thread is not SR, and
> Lorentz has invented his equations for
> another theory.

Poincaré-Lorentz transformations do not pose any particular problems.

They came out of the brain of the French mathematician to try to explain 
the negativity of the Michelson and Morley experiment.

Indeed, if we take the speed of light in a vacuum, and add or subtract the 
speed of the Earth in space, there should be, depending on the position of 
the interferometer arms, and at six-month intervals,
very significant variations in the interference fringes.

However, nothing happens.

As if the Earth were at rest in an absolute vacuum, which seems absurd.

Physicists have correctly solved the problem by assuming that our idea of 
​​"speed in absolute space" was an idea given a priori, and that in 
relativity, it had no meaning.

What would this absolute frame of reference be, where things could exist 
at absolute rest?

It does not exist, and everything exists "as a function of "something 
else" and according to a relative speed.

It took me many years to find myself (that is to say really by myself, and 
not like the idiot who just repeats them without understanding them) the 
Poincaré transformations.

I don't think they can be discussed.

Many things can be discussed, it's true.

But not that.

I recall the Poincaré formulas given in positive form (which I also do) 
and in Hachel notation:
x'=(x+Vo.To)/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)
y'=y
z'=z
To'=(To+x.Vo/c²)/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)
t'=t

These five coordinates are labels. They transpose, and vice versa by 
changing the sign that gives the reciprocal equation in perfect 
mathematics) the real world of an object in what the same object crossing 
it at speed Vo would perceive.

Poincaré's physics and mathematics are entirely correct.

R.H.