Re: Relativistic aberration

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 12:55:23 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

>
Le 15/07/2024 à 14:33, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :

>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:58:07 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

>
I beg you to understand something about the simple things I say here

on

this forum.

>
Feel assured, I DO understand.

>
So your presence is a true miracle.
>

1. Two observers who cross paths, and according to Hachel's (or
Poincaré's, properly understood) transformations, have exactly the

same

vision of the universe and at the same instant (as long as we

understand

the notion of universal simultaneity).

>
Dr. Hachel is describing Newton's universe, not Poincaré's.

>
 No.
>
 No no. Absolutely not.

"Universal simultaneity" IS Newtonian physics.

For example, if you ask Hachel what is the duration of a uniformly
accelerated journey to Tau Ceti, he will answer:
To=(x/c).sqrt(1+2c²/ax)

Dr. Hachel doesn't define his terms.  Is To wrt the traveler or the
earth?  Is a and x wrt the traveler or the earth?  This problem has
been solved many times and are freely available on the internet.
For example, http://www.zitterbug.net/future/casr0715.pdf.

and he will ask all students around the world to learn this formula by
heart.

Why would anyone want to memorize that when there is so much better
stuff
around?

This is not a Newtonian formula.

Of course it's not, but universal simultaneity IS Newtonian.

We will say: therefore he is a relativist like Einstein.

No, he is a relativist like Hachel, and uses a different geometry for
space and time problems.

And wrong.

As well as different equations, sometimes different transformations. But
not much Newtonian in there.
Example: what is the formula giving the instantaneous speed of uniformly
accelerated objects?
Voi/c=[1+c²/2ax]^-(1/2)
This formula does not exist either in Newton or Einstein.

And does not describe anything in the universe.

Another example: transformations into rotating frames of reference.
>
<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?_hiIkN_NB6Jm2XOJZeHK7Fy9L2E@jntp/Data.Media:1>
>
These transformations do not exist neither in Newton nor in Einstein.
>
R.H.

And do not describe anything in the universe.  Making up equations out
of
thin air does not make one a savant.