Re: Relativistic aberration

Le 01/08/2024 à 20:04, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

 So far I have several times seen you claim to have
correctly explained the Langevin paradox, but I have
never seen you do it.
 Should I be impressed?
 

>

Yes, I think you should be impressed.
I have solved a lot of things, and understood a lot of things, like clicks in the mind, and the explanation of the traveler of Langevin is a famous one.
I have explained many times how it works, but before the treatment, you must first convince the patient that he is sick, and that is not easy in a world where everyone is certain of being right, of having understood correctly, of being sure that nothing should be reversed.
The first thing to do, and perhaps you have already done it, is to completely describe the evolutions of Terrence and Stella.
Then the first problem will arise, the one opposed to Einstein and Poincaré 100 scientists who had noticed that something was wrong and that reciprocity was becoming absurd.
We will then sweep the dust under the carpet by pushing the paradox further, but without really resolving it.
This consists of trying to solve (hundreds of publications on the web) with the idea of ​​the Doppler effect, and we called it: description by the Doppler effect. This will then mathematically solve part of the problem, and it is normal, since without realizing it, we bring in spatial anisochrony.
But only part of it. If we look closely, the apparent speeds (what we see in telescopes) become absurd, and the paradox, worse, this time enters into incoherence.
It took me decades to go around in circles on a simple little equation, before having the flash of lucidity that no one had been able to have, because it is not obvious from the start, and Minkowski geometry is not good.
R.H.