Path: ...!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: A short proof of the inconsistency of [SR]
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 17:16:46 +0200
Organization: CCCP
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <vavc4u$109ac$16@dont-email.me>
References: <17ee15afea6b29a3$410850$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <fefc23dfe9b6c853e4f260e6f9acc2f1@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f0660d33597e0a$609532$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <ecc1cbf0f484e237b82d312335a771c3@www.novabbs.com>
 <17f0863c3f05fd66$618168$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vasjam$e2la$16@dont-email.me>
 <17f087f24fe0f957$618169$546728$c2565adb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vaslcv$e2la$20@dont-email.me>
 <17f092fe6db35995$760519$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vav1nd$109ac$2@dont-email.me>
 <17f0d1c55cdbf285$768488$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vav4db$109ac$5@dont-email.me>
 <17f0d32671cd6d37$768491$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vav69q$109ac$10@dont-email.me>
 <17f0d4a4078e252f$768492$505029$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vav7nq$109ac$12@dont-email.me>
 <17f0d54834d96449$659868$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
 <vavan6$109ac$14@dont-email.me>
 <17f0d8d0a2d3573c$666917$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2024 17:16:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0bc100f5050f6c852213e21dd186125e";
	logging-data="1058124"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ZSoMWDhcADgz8tT/n45yr"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4V+Hs3/qHnXcskrDry0BzV9xix8=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <17f0d8d0a2d3573c$666917$558427$c2065a8b@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 3000

Le 31/08/2024 à 17:10, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
> W dniu 31.08.2024 o 16:52, Python pisze:
....
>> "This question doesn't matter" is a perfectly adequate answer
>> to a question that actually does not matter in the context
> 
> Python, [...] the context was - the [...]
> [scientists] like you to spelling
> the old, valid in 1905 (when [Einstein] lived
> [...]) definition of second.
> 
> Of course, your lie of "doesn't matter" is also
> ridiculous. Does [SR] make any numeric
> predictions with units?

It does.

> if it does - how can
> the definitions of these units irrelevant ?

For SR certainly. For experiments the definition and the
practicality of measuring devices is relevant.

This is why experiments usually use calibrated clocks of
some kind instead of building a full copy of the Solar System.

Such clocks being calibrated according to the current definition
of time, i.e.
- Decades ago against duration of a day
- Now using cesium atoms

Another question, Maciej?

> -- 
> poor stinker, poor poor stinker