Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Einstein cheated with his fraudulent derivation of Lorentz
 transforms
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 13:49:37 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 132
Message-ID: <voa836$l6c7$1@dont-email.me>
References: <6eb926ee058330958787e0095602f2b0@www.novabbs.com>
 <JcQoP.16994$M7r5.10736@fx16.ams4>
 <0281fd2aa8b77628745ebcde5118b9a3@www.novabbs.com>
 <vo368g$344dp$1@dont-email.me>
 <fc3528c0f1bc2b170c85efcc2a9bbfe1@www.novabbs.com>
 <vo5m8a$3klph$1@dont-email.me>
 <6e2be2c7df8226f34eb6ae70a0b3c52a@www.novabbs.com>
 <vo8ckq$6j7k$1@dont-email.me>
 <d6fb7ee989291b3dc319768eecd83914@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2025 13:46:31 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e8cf0323df4a18576e985de82b7e158d";
	logging-data="694663"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18LbMAU78sCgDZ/9Os4usaA"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KZpS5AGNe4FwzY00sDOusZvUsnE=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <d6fb7ee989291b3dc319768eecd83914@www.novabbs.com>
Bytes: 5240

Den 08.02.2025 21:14, skrev rhertz:
> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 19:54:58 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
> 
>>
>> I have now read your attachment, and I didn't panic.

Your "graphics":

>> I was however mildly shocked by the extent of your confusion.
>>
>> What I found was this:
>>   Δτ₁ = x'/(c-v)
>>   Δτ₂ = x'/(c-v)+x'/(c+v)
>>   τ₁ = τ₀ + Δτ₁
>>   τ₂ = τ₀ + Δτ₂
>>
>> I won't bother to yet again explain why this is nonsense,
>> because you are unable to learn.
>>

I have read your "graphics"!

Do you still not understand why I called it nonsense ? :-D

> 
> If you can't read posts correctly in your Eternal August, try this site
> with a browser.
> 
> Maybe you'll be able to observed my last posts and graphics and
> enter in reason. But I doubt it.


> 
> I REPEAT MY LATEST POST, IN CASE YOU MISSED IT, ASSHOLE!
> 
> From: rhertz
> 
> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 14:03
> 
> ******************************************************************
> Asked to Google:
> 
> What is x' in Einstein's derivation of Lorentz transforms?
> 
> Answer from Google AI (which is a resume of many documents):
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 

The AI did obviously not understand your question.

> AI Overview
> 
> In Einstein's derivation of the Lorentz transformations, "x'" represents
> the position of an event as measured in a moving reference frame
> (denoted as S'), while "x" represents the position of the same event in
> a stationary reference frame (S); essentially, it's the transformed
> x-coordinate in the moving frame, taking into account the relative
> velocity between the two frames.
> Key points about x':
> 
> Relative to x:
> "x'" is related to "x" through the Lorentz transformation equation,
> which includes the relative velocity (v) between the reference frames
> and the Lorentz factor (γ).

Did you find this remarkable?

The frames of reference the AI refers to are obviously:
The "stationary system": S(x,t)
The "moving system":     S'(x',t')

As the AI says:
"x'" is related to "x" through the Lorentz transformation:

  x' = (x - vt)/√(1−v²/c²)

> 
> Interpretation:
> If an event occurs at position "x" in the stationary frame, "x'"
> indicates where that same event would be observed in the moving frame.

Right. (But a bit awkwardly put.)

If the coordinates of an event are (x,t) in S,
then the coordinates of the same event are (x',t') in S'
where:
   x' = (x - vt)/√(1−v²/c²)
   t' = (t - vx/c²)/√(1−v²/c²)

That's why it is called a _coordinate_ transformation.

Did you have a point with quoting the AI's trivial answer?

> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Also: Galilean transform in Einstein's paper:
> 
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/ltrans.html

The Galilean transform in a webpage from HyperPhysics,
Georgia State University, is Hardly
"Galilean transform in Einstein's paper".

There is no Galilean transform in Einstein's 1905 paper.

Did you have a point with this reference?

> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> NOW, WHAT ABOUT THIS PAPER?
> 
> Einstein’s Derivation of the Lorentz Transformations
> in the1905 Paper is Internally Inconsistent
> 
> Jon C. Freeman
> 
> https://www.nikhef.nl/~h02/deriv_lt_freeman.pdf

Have a look at some of the 6341 other "Research Papers" in
"the general science Journal":
https://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals-Papers/Type/Research%20Papers
... and you will understand why Freeman chose to publish his paper in
    that particular journal.



-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/