Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Langevin's paradox again
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:16:47 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 86
Message-ID: <v7376c$mo0c$2@dont-email.me>
References: <FER4K03RCuXsBiIlfVNSgR0vilQ@jntp> <v6mlhe$21277$2@dont-email.me>
 <9oTvw4-YSIPb1dubtdBwcc_MeX8@jntp> <v6ojjl$2fb4i$1@dont-email.me>
 <oifv2gv8lSmpEE3OlZ7h_aGUb_Q@jntp> <v6r5of$30t0t$1@dont-email.me>
 <LdiOEXosVQBwmzyUbXQtBoNVQOg@jntp> <v715id$8suh$1@dont-email.me>
 <DhH3TFRYDEo0-lO-5RDf6PAXH2I@jntp> <v7312o$m1pa$1@dont-email.me>
 <XwY8ULD6v2JS4ZHo_cHsUB4VbmM@jntp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:11:40 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="fda1399f84c9280debec44e8655048a9";
	logging-data="745484"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18+ag1Hx4Qqq0Mo1QcyI5hq"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:H47N4+NCz8WXVhlzS+JUyJa69Ck=
In-Reply-To: <XwY8ULD6v2JS4ZHo_cHsUB4VbmM@jntp>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 4292

Den 15.07.2024 14:23, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 15/07/2024 à 13:27, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>> Den 14.07.2024 23:11, skrev Richard Hachel:
> 
>> What does your theory predict the speed of the protons in the LHC is?
>>
>> What is the measured speed of the protons in the LHC?
> 
> But I have already answered you a thousand times.
> The observable, i.e. measurable, speed of the proton in the LHC is 
> 0.999999989c.
> I set Vo=0.999999989c.
> It's still very simple to understand, and if you made more effort to 
> achieve coherent discussions, we wouldn't be talking such banalities.
> 
> I just pointed out, even if it may seem very destabilizing, that this is 
> only the observable, measured speed, but that it is not the deep reality 
> of things.
> 
> You know very well that the measurement of the shadow of a building is 
> not the measurement of the building itself. It depends on the position 
> of the sun.
> 
> We have the same thing in relativity.
> 
> When we measure, in our frame of reference, the distances to be covered, 
> we have a precise measurement to note.
> 
> But when we measure the time it takes to cover this distance, a huge 
> illusion appears because apart from the rocket or the particle, which 
> only have one watch, we are obliged to use two watches (even if we come 
> back to the same physical watch, after a long journey, it is no longer 
> really "the same watch").
> 
> Paul, breathe, exhale.
> 
> Measuring time with two watches placed in different places can only lead 
> to temporal aberrations.
> 
> Speed ​​being the quotient of distance over time, we will no longer have 
> the same notion of speed. An illusion will appear since our way of 
> measuring things becomes incorrect.
> 
> When you measure the observable speed Vo of your proton, you find 
> Vo=0.999999989c but if you want to know the real speed
> in the lab reference frame, you must convert (i.e. remove the bias from 
> the measurement).
> Vr=Vo/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²)
> 
> Conversely, if you know Vr, you use the reciprocal equation to find Vo.
> 
> Vo=Vr/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²)
> 
> The real speed of your proton (not the one you measure) is therefore 
> Vr=6947c.

Why so many words to give the simple answer:

Your theory predicts that the real speed of
the proton in the LHC is 6947c.

> 
> This is enormous speed.
> 
> If you know the mass of your proton, and if you know its momentum at 
> this instant, you just need to use p=m.v
> 
> You will see that v, in reality, is Vr=6947c and not Vo=0.999999989c.
> 
> R.H.

You failed to answer the second question.
"What is the measured speed of the protons in the LHC?"

You know the answer.
The real speed of the protons is measured to be less than c.

So since the predicted speed is different from
the measured speed, your theory is falsified.


-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/