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: Python <python@invalid.org>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Incorrect mathematical integration
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 17:35:13 +0200
Organization: CCCP
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <v80fnh$2qfr7$2@dont-email.me>
References: <EKV4LWfwyF4mvRIpW8X1iiirzQk@jntp> <v7p7bu$1cd5m$1@dont-email.me>
 <oEpFQDJJhcpYoGFheTTVIKntZUE@jntp> <v7qt4k$1obhi$1@dont-email.me>
 <2DB5P6IpybAncHUWmFdX55lJN7A@jntp> <v7ri3a$1rs1b$1@dont-email.me>
 <ftN6UmDr7W62aPoOQpYysEUFAh8@jntp> <v7rp5h$1t5kp$1@dont-email.me>
 <BQ5j0PykzttrIMqyw16zXh2VQVU@jntp> <v7u8d2$2dodj$1@dont-email.me>
 <WxEQQfYMZ9Ktt8wAuyCpiQ5L8Tg@jntp> <v807nm$2rgp7$1@dont-email.me>
 <17e5c6e1a4cf2258$138343$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <v80eqs$2qfr7$1@dont-email.me>
 <17e5cd14b48b6998$20629$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 17:35:14 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4b538f1c29966e9f8a5e5956cc22905a";
	logging-data="2965351"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+dRkYbmP4/iKTx2zMPH++t"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gAyaKhzzIHuWd8tIosg1U+du9Pw=
In-Reply-To: <17e5cd14b48b6998$20629$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5449

Le 26/07/2024 à 17:32, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> W dniu 26.07.2024 o 17:19, Python pisze:
>> Le 26/07/2024 à 15:38, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>> W dniu 26.07.2024 o 15:18, Paul.B.Andersen pisze:
>>>> Den 25.07.2024 21:50, skrev Richard Hachel:
>>>>> Le 25/07/2024 à 21:17, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see you have given up responding to my post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So let us terminate this discussion with the following
>>>>>> demonstration of the geniality of Doctor Richard Hachel:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> | Den 24.07.2024 00:19, skrev Richard Hachel:
>>>>>> |> Don't tell me you don't understand that the proton rotates
>>>>>> |> 11.25 thousand times per second in the laboratory frame but
>>>>>> |> 78 million times per second in the proton frame.
>>>>>> |>
>>>>
>>>> Richard Hachel's statement:
>>>> "The proton rotates 11.25 thousand times per second in
>>>>   the laboratory frame but 78 million times per second
>>>>   in the proton frame."
>>>> is quite genial, because it sums up Richard Hachel's
>>>> confusion and stupidity in one single sentence!
>>>>
>>>> Well done, Richard!:-D
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When a proton moves around the circuit once, a stationary clock
>>>>>> in the circuit will measure the one round around the circuit to
>>>>>> last the time T = 90.0623 μs
>>>>>> The proton (if it had a clock) will measure the one round around
>>>>>> the circuit to last the time τ = 12.0727 ns
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this mean that when the proton moves around the circuit once,
>>>>>> then it moves once around the circuit in the lab frame while
>>>>>> it moves T/τ = 7460 times around the circuit in the proton frame?
>>>>>
>>>>> But no!
>>>>>
>>>>> It's stupid.
>>>>>
>>>>> The proton only goes around once, and the time it takes, measured 
>>>>> by the laboratory clock (which is actually TWO clocks A and B 
>>>>> combined into one) is T = 90.0623 μs.
>>>>>
>>>>> I write To = 90.0623 μs to say that this is the observable time in 
>>>>> the laboratory reference frame.
>>>>>
>>>>> But if I measure with the watch that the proton wears on his left 
>>>>> wrist, I will measure a time of τ = 12.0727 ns.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you repeat what is quoted above?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thus, for the proton, the distance AB (in the laboratory reference 
>>>>> frame) was crossed 7460 times faster.
>>>>
>>>> So we can change the wording of your genial statement above to:
>>>>
>>>> "The proton rotates once per 90.0623 μs in the laboratory frame
>>>>   but 7460 times per 90.0623 μs in the proton frame."
>>>>
>>>> Even better!
>>>>
>>>>> I call this notion the real speed of the proton, even if it sounds 
>>>>> funny when you're not used to seeing things that way.
>>>>> The speed usually measured, and observed in the laboratory, which 
>>>>> is the distance in the laboratory per laboratory time, I call it v 
>>>>> (like the physicists) or better, Vo, to point out that we only ever 
>>>>> observe one notion of things, and not real things, distorted by the 
>>>>> nature of local space-time, of the local frame of reference.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 'nuff said! :-D
>>>>
>>>> A hint:
>>>> Measured in the proton frame, the length of the ring is
>>>
>>> A lie, of course, as expected from
>>> a relativistic piece of shit. No
>>> measurements were ever performed
>>> "in proton frame"; what even worse -
>>> according to his moronic physics
>>> (its quantum part) there  is no
>>> such thing as "the proton frame".
>>
>> Quantum mechanics is moronic also, 
> 
> 
> Not as much as The Shit - at least it
> works - but obviously.

"it works - but obviously" (while being somewhat "moronic"),
"information engineer (ahah)" Wozniak. What does that seriously *mean*?

>  And nothing like
> "the proton frame" according to it.

The link I provided shows you wrong.