Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity

Liste des GroupesRevenir à p relativity 
Sujet : Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity
De : r.hachel (at) *nospam* liscati.fr.invalid (Richard Hachel)
Groupes : sci.physics.relativity
Date : 05. Oct 2024, 11:14:24
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Nemoweb
Message-ID : <Rl69eBWAWqiMMrespZGn0TKf208@jntp>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Nemo/1.0
Le 05/10/2024 à 09:52, Thomas Heger a écrit :
 
 Sure:
 The observer see remote events 'live'.
 But he sees remote events also delayed!
 What we see in the night sky is NOT happening now, but earlier than now.
 We see events now, which happenend the longer ago the further  away.
 It is therefore patently irrelevant, what the observer sees, because these impressions are pictures, we receive from the past.
 The 'real thing' is supposed to exist, but remains invisible for a long time.
 This 'real thing' is invisible, but real, while our impressions are visible, but not real.
 We would need to correct this error 'by hand', because we cannot see, what is happening now.
 Such a correction isn't that difficult, since we only need to take the delay into consideration.
 A certain shell around the observer represents a certain set of points, from where we receive simultaneous signals at the same time.
 For other shells further away or closer to us, we need to add or subtract the delay relative to that shell mentioned above.
 If we reduce that shell to zero radius, we would need to measure only delay.
 This delay should be used to compensate the time needed for signals to travel from remote events to the observers.
 What is happening now, that will be seen with such a delay later.
 Therefore, the (hyperplane of the) present is real, but cannot be seen,
 It is constructed by assuming a hypothetical signal, which needs no time to travel, hence is here once emitted.
  This does not exist, but that doesn't matter for a definition.
  TH
 ..
 
>
It is a pity that you do not understand, or do not want to understand the theory of relativity Hachel version, yet much simpler, logical, and without paradox (the Langevin paradox, the Andromeda paradox, and the Erheinfest paradox do not exist in Hachel).
You still do not understand the notion of relativity of simultaneity and it is a great pity.
We observe the universe live, as paradoxical as it may seem, and the belief in a light that takes years to reach us is only due to a misunderstanding of spatiotemporal geometry.
It is the child who is right about the big relativist bigwig.
A child who sees a star (let's say Sirius) does not ask himself the question of whether what he sees is real or not, or whether Sirius has not existed for years...
And it is the child who is right, everything is given live (in a vacuum).
The huge blunder of the physicists is intellectual, and not experimental.
They will lay a wire coupled to a source A and another, coupled to a source B.
Then they will launch an electromagnetic signal from A to B.
They do not notice that they are neither in A nor in B, but placed transversely to the flow of information. This is what I have been explaining for 40 years, and for 40 years, it would seem that relativistic religiosity is so fierce that no one WANTS to understand, while it is at the intellectual level of a middle school student.
Transversely, in my hyperplane of present, of simultaneity, I will notice that t=AB/c and I will decree that the speed of light is v=c.
However, I should rather write Vo=c (because it is only what I observe from my transverse position, and NEVER longitudinal).
Physicists do not realize that the light of Sirius is instantaneous, that Sirius IS in my present moment, and that we are FOR ME, in perfect simultaneity of existence.
This horse in this meadow, this moon in this sky, this galaxy in this telescope are observed live.
The error consists in putting oneself in a transverse position (where I am not!!!) and saying, I see the light of Sirius moving from Sirius towards the earth at speed c. This would be true, but this observer is not ME.
For me, it is a false and abstract idea linked to a lack of knowledge of the theory of relativity as it should have been taught for 120 years, and which has been going around in circles for 120 years, full of paradox, because we form an abstract image of the real nature of electromagnetic interactions which are FOR the receiver instantaneous, and which for the distant transverse observer, take the form of a wave of present which moves at c.
Do you understand?
It is very important to understand.
Anyone who does not understand this basis will go around in circles for another 120 years...
R.H.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
1 Oct 24 * the notion of relativity of simultaneity71Richard Hachel
1 Oct 24 +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity40Python
1 Oct 24 i+* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity36Thomas Heger
1 Oct 24 ii+- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
1 Oct 24 ii`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity34Richard Hachel
1 Oct 24 ii `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity33Python
1 Oct 24 ii  +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Richard Hachel
1 Oct 24 ii  i`- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
2 Oct 24 ii  `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity30Thomas Heger
2 Oct 24 ii   +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity26Python
2 Oct 24 ii   i+* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Maciej Wozniak
2 Oct 24 ii   ii`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Python
2 Oct 24 ii   ii `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Maciej Wozniak
2 Oct 24 ii   i+- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity21Thomas Heger
3 Oct 24 ii   i +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity4Python
3 Oct 24 ii   i i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i i `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Python
3 Oct 24 ii   i i  `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity5Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i i+* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Python
3 Oct 24 ii   i ii`- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
5 Oct 24 ii   i i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Thomas Heger
5 Oct 24 ii   i i `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity11Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii   i  +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
5 Oct 24 ii   i  `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity9Thomas Heger
5 Oct 24 ii   i   `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity8Richard Hachel
6 Oct 24 ii   i    `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity7Thomas Heger
6 Oct 24 ii   i     +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
6 Oct 24 ii   i     `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity5Richard Hachel
8 Oct 24 ii   i      `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity4Thomas Heger
8 Oct 24 ii   i       `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Maciej Wozniak
11 Oct 24 ii   i        `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Thomas Heger
11 Oct 24 ii   i         `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
2 Oct 24 ii   `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Richard Hachel
3 Oct 24 ii    `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Thomas Heger
3 Oct 24 ii     `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
1 Oct 24 i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Richard Hachel
1 Oct 24 i +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
2 Oct 24 i `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Mikko
7 Oct 24 +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity27JanPB
7 Oct 24 i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity26Richard Hachel
8 Oct 24 i +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Python
8 Oct 24 i i`- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
9 Oct 24 i `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity23Mikko
9 Oct 24 i  `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity22Richard Hachel
10 Oct 24 i   `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity21Mikko
10 Oct 24 i    `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity20Richard Hachel
11 Oct 24 i     `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity19Mikko
11 Oct 24 i      +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
12 Oct 24 i      `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity17Thomas Heger
12 Oct 24 i       `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity16Mikko
12 Oct 24 i        +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Maciej Wozniak
12 Oct 24 i        `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity14Richard Hachel
12 Oct 24 i         +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity9Python
12 Oct 24 i         i+* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity4Maciej Wozniak
12 Oct 24 i         ii`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Python
12 Oct 24 i         ii `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Maciej Wozniak
12 Oct 24 i         ii  `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
12 Oct 24 i         i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity4Richard Hachel
13 Oct 24 i         i `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Python
13 Oct 24 i         i  `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Maciej Wozniak
13 Oct 24 i         i   `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Python
13 Oct 24 i         +* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Thomas Heger
13 Oct 24 i         i`* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity2Richard Hachel
14 Oct 24 i         i `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Thomas Heger
13 Oct 24 i         `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Mikko
14 Oct 24 `* Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity3Sylvia Else
14 Oct 24  +- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Richard Hachel
14 Oct 24  `- Re: the notion of relativity of simultaneity1Maciej Wozniak

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal