Re: tau egality in relalivity

Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :

As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)

If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same time, it goes without saying that the improper times will be equal. This is the very definition of logical thinking.

Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT
a logical way of thinking.

[snip repetition of the same babbling]

You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.

I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument. What I am showing is that your claim can only be
true on pointless situation i.e. both trajectories are
exactly the same or Galilean Relativity. In all other
cases it is proven WRONG.

However, I am the one who is right.
You simply use Minkowski's metric and I use Hachel's.
One of us is therefore wrong about the proper times of accelerated objects. Bigger for Hachel, smaller for you and Paul.
Experimentation will necessarily prove me right due to my theoretical consistency (yours is incoherent in its latest equations).

What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
But the conclusion is about elapsed proper times, which does not
depend on a choice of frame (it is "absolute"). This is a HUGE
logical problem. A frame dependent property cannot imply a frame
independent one (except of course, if the latter is always true, which
is the case in Galilean Relativity, but then your claim is just
pointless).
Then you add the condition that elapsed [improper] times are equal,
which is always as the time between any pair or events is unique,
it cannot have two values as seen in a given frame of reference.
So this condition is void.
Your claim is dead in the water at first read by any decent
person. You are not, by the way : you are a mentally ill egomaniac
fool.