Re: Relativistic aberration

W dniu 12.08.2024 o 16:23, gharnagel pisze:

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 13:21:58 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
W dniu 12.08.2024 o 14:53, gharnagel pisze:
>

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 4:33:02 +0000, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
Harrie asserts t'<>t,

>
Do I?  How could I without knowing what t' and t are? :-))
>

but when asked what t' is then - he's only spitting,
insulting and slandering.

>
I wasn't the one calling people "trash"

>
You've used many others insults instead.
And slanders as well.

 Only in response to Wozniak's insults and slanders.  He

No, trash. It was oppositely.

Let's try again: so, when t(time indicated
by a ground base clock) is 2024-08-31
17:00:00.00000000 - t' (time indicated by
a satellite clock) will be? Consider the
simultaneity of the base.

>
Wozniak doesn't say WHERE the measurement of the
satellite clock is made.  Of course,

>
Harrie lies and desperately tries
to pretend that an answer different
than "2024-08-31 17:00:00.00000000
with the precision of an acceptable
error" exists.

 Of course different answers exist, depending
on where the measurement is made.

I've told you precisely and 2 or 3 times
where it is made. In the base.
And your answer is?
Let me guess: more lies, more slanders,
more insults.