Re: Space and spacetime

Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
W dniu 22.06.2024 o 20:47, gharnagel pisze:

>
Maciej Wozniak wrote:

>
And why won't you stop your iditic dodging
and answer what are the prediction of the moronic
physics of your moronic guru for my example?

 Wozzie "question" was "What does an observer going at
c/2 through the solar system measure as the length of
a day?"
 Since the observer is not on earth, a "day" is not well
defined.

>
Too bad for your idiot guru who was using
it as the time unit. Don't you think, poor
halfbrain?

Too bad for dishonest, stupid Wozzie-fool that he can't
articulate an unambiguous question.  His dishonesty is
underlined by his pivot to blaming Saint Albert for it.
He has this compulsion that just won't let him rest in
peace.  Science has moved on, bur autistic Wozzie is
obsessed with him.
Then he pivots to a different question:
"So, according to you and your idiot gurus - in LET
every observer, stationary in ether or not - would
observe light moving at speed c. Right?"
And I responded:
"What's the matter, mathematically-incompetent Wozzie,
can't actually USE the theory and calculate the answer
for yourself?"

And dishonest Wozzie projects his incompetence on others:
 And then he pivots to a third question:
 "Is the RELATIVISTIC formula of velocity adding a part of
Lorentz's ETHER theory?  Yes or no"
 So it's become quite confusing just which question Wozzie
wants answered.

May be confusing for such an idiot
as you are, Harrie. Sure.

But not confusing to an severely autistic "information engineer"
who rejects any information he finds distasteful :-)
So he admits his inability to stick to one topic. 

Only such an idiot can believe and repeat such
an absurd lie.

 So Wozzie denies that human constructs (like the constancy of the
speed of light) can't be tested against nature?  What is the matter
with this demented fool?

>
He knows the subject, in opposition to you
or your idiot gurus.

Wozzie doesn't "know" anything.  All he has is a limited form of
"information."  Maybe he hates Saint Albert so much because of what
he said:
“Information is not knowledge.” -- Albert Einstein

But - see: 0 meridian has something in common with both The Shit
of  your idiot guru and Lorontz ether theory, after all...

 So Wozzie believes that 0 meridian is a fundamental property of
nature, like the speed of light?

Nope, you're just projecting your moronic mania
of fundamental properties of the nature on me.

So Wozzie admits that his 0 meridian argument was a red herring, a
distraction intended to confuse.  This once again underlines his basic
dishonesty.  Whenever he calls others liars, he is projecting.

 This moron has gone totally off the rails.  Python, call that nurse

NOW!
>
See, trash - I've proven the moronic mumble
of your idiot guru to be not even consistent

Repeating this lie ad infinitum proves the basic dishonesty of this
escapee
from an information (not knowledge) institution.

and you can do nothing about it spsrt of
barking, insulting and slandering.

Wozzie is projecting again, because that is exactly what he does.

But you will do what you can for the glory of your
moronic church - that's what it's training
its doggies for, after all.

Wozzie needs a good dose of The One he just can't let go of:
“A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.”
-- Albert Einstein
"Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted
with
important matters." -- Albert Einstein
“The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its
limits”
-- Albert Einstein
"Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." -
Albert Einstein
Speaking of the LTE:
"it is clear that the equations must be linear on account of the
properties of homogeneity which we attribute to space and time." -- A. Einstein,
OtEoMB
That means the LTE must be of the form:
x' = Gx + Ht
t' = At + Bx
A stationary object is moving at v in another frame:
0 = Gx + Ht, Gx = - Ht = Gvt
For the case where x is stationary (at x = 0):
t' = At + Bx = At, x' = Ht = -Gvt
x'/t' = -v, therefore A = G, so
x' = G(x - t)
t' = G(t - Bx/G)
If we assume t' = t, then G = 1:
x' = x - t
t' = t
and we have the Galilean transform, but if we assume that
there is a speed that is the same in all inertial frames:
x'/t' = c = (x/t - v)/(1 + Bx/t) = (c - v)/(1 + Bc),
then B = -v/c^2 and
x' = G(x - v)
t' = G(t - vx/c^2)
All that's left is to evaluate G, which turns out to be gamma.
And, oh look!  The relativistic velocity equation was part of
the derivation of the LTE!  Whoda thought?  Certainly not
mathematically-incompetent Wozzie-fool :-))
And the only difference between the GTE and the LTE is that
there is a speed which is the same in all inertial frames which
replaces the assumption that t' = t.  So Wozzie-fool's assertion
that t' = t in the GPS disproves relativity but the LTE are just
fine is complete bool poop.