Re: Relativistic aberration

W dniu 09.08.2024 o 10:56, Python pisze:

Le 09/08/2024 à 07:35, Thomas Heger a écrit :

Am Donnerstag000008, 08.08.2024 um 13:17 schrieb Python:

Le 08/08/2024 à 09:05, Thomas Heger a écrit :
...

Actually Poincare did and assumed a four dimensional 'curved' spacetime, from which Euclid's three-dimensional space is a 'sub-chapter'.

>
This is not true.
>

This euclidean space is kind of projection into the realm of the local observer, who 'cuts' spacetime into time and space, simply by being somewhere.

>
This is not true.
>

This is a very different concept than the usual mainstream interpretation and actually different to the interpretation of Einstein in his 1905 paper, too.

>
This is not true.
>

Poincare's idea was further developed by Hermann Minkowski.

>
This is true.
>

So Poincare's relativity is different to Einstein's, which was mainly based on Hendrik Lorentz and his 'Lorentz transform'.

>
This is not true.
>

But Poincare regarded this concept of Lorentz as wrong

>
This is not true.
>

(even if he invented the name 'Lorentz transform').

>
This is true.
>

>
Would mind telling a little about your reasons to think so?
>
You just say:
>
this is true and that ain't.
>
But why do you think so?

 Because I've actually read Poincaré, Einstein, et al.

Whatever you say - Poincare had enough wit
to understand how idiotic rejecting Euclid
would be, and he has written it clearly
enough for anyone able to read (even if not
clearly enough for you, poor stinker).