Path: ...!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: Why relativity is a pseudoscience? First approach.
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 12:05:48 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 73
Message-ID: <vbp5j0$2taov$1@dont-email.me>
References: <d8b52c0ad27618036611e0704e58e607@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 12:04:16 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="067fe90282581b8bfaaff0dd04a9fe73";
	logging-data="3058463"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1921tRWcqUggb7T47h0Tqka"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NNEyHtXayVT1LECCdARy0J6NngI=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <d8b52c0ad27618036611e0704e58e607@www.novabbs.com>
Bytes: 3762

Den 10.09.2024 07:42, skrev rhertz:
> 
> WHY THE ASSERTION ABOUT RELATIVITY BEING A PSEUDOSCIENCE? THE FOLLOWING
> APPLY:
> 
> 1) As the distance between both reference frames is increasing
> constantly, the communication of data between both frames is IMPOSSIBLE
> to exist while exchanging information about time and position of both
> frames, even using light as a carrier of data. Both origins will be
> always out of sync, even when ghost observers, located at both origins,
> are trying to communicate between them.
> 

Hilarious, no? :-D

> 2) Therefore, the only way to PRETEND that remote data (x,t, x', t') is
> KNOWN, is by using a couple of formulae (Lorentz, Poincaré), TO COMPUTE
> at each frame time and position of the other frame.
> This is THE FATAL CONCEPTUAL ERROR OF RELATIVITY.
> 
> Using Lorentz transforms introduces (ARTIFICIALLY: just mathematics), a
> NON-LINEAR BEHAVIOR of space and time, which is a mere function of the
> differential velocity v.
> 
> 
> Due to this, remote sensing IS IMPOSSIBLE, because both frames are being
> increasingly separated, and remote sensing is always out of sync.
> Considering that the CORE of special relativity is that (Lorentz), time
> and space ARE DIFFERENT at each frame, a valid exchange of information
> (x,t, x', t') between observers at both frames IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE.
> 
> 
> So, the ONLY CHANCE that an observer at any frame has, in order to know
> time and space value AT THE OTHER FRAME is TO BELIEVE that mathematics
> (not observations) give the desired answers.

Absolutely beautiful, Richard.
Your sense of humour has really evolved during your
absence from this forum!



> YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE IN LORENTZ EQUATIONS AS THE HOLY GRAIL OF A NEW
> PHYSICS.
> 
> To make things MUCH WORSE, you HAVE TO BELIEVE that in particle
> accelerators, the full set of data is obtained with "real measurements".
> But for this to happens, a disgraceful hypothesis has to be introduced:
> THAT AT THE END POINT (COLLISIONS OR DECAYS), BOTH REFERENCE FRAMES
> MERGES INTO ONE, WHERE DETECTORS ARE LOCATED.

Quite.
  Accelerators work because the physicist BELIEVE IN LORENTZ
  EQUATIONS and have designed the accelerators according to SR.

Or was your point that they don't work?

If the accelerators work it is a confirmation of SR.
So no, they don't work. They are part of the great conspiracy,
and all the physicist designing and operating them are frauds who
say whatever they have to say to keep their jobs.
> 
> After all, physicists have the right to eat and to maintain a family
> (while living in shame).
> 

Well said, Richard!

-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/