Re: Relativistic aberration

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:58:07 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

>
Le 15/07/2024 à 04:52, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :

>
Dr. Hachel isn't being honest here.  The two observers do NOT have the
same "vision" of the universe.  The cube with NOT be 60 meters away
for the moving observer because of length contraction:  D will only be
36 meters, and as for "vision," the observer will see the cube >36
meters away because of the finite speed of light.
....
Dr. Hachel should study the simpler relativistic situations, which he
has shown that he does not understand.

>
I beg you to understand something about the simple things I say here on
this forum.

Feel assured, I DO understand.

1. Two observers who cross paths, and according to Hachel's (or
Poincaré's, properly understood) transformations, have exactly the same
vision of the universe and at the same instant (as long as we understand
the notion of universal simultaneity).

Dr. Hachel is describing Newton's universe, not Poincaré's.

2. This means that whatever is seen by one is seen by the other, and
that nothing that is not seen by one can be seen by the other.

Those are two different things.  They both can see real THINGS, given
the proper instruments, but they don't see them traveling at the same
velocity nor in the same place nor at the same time.

However, it is very clear.

You muddy up the waters of reality.

I'm not begging you to accept it, I'm begging you to understand it.
You talk to me about contraction of distances and you tell me that for
the second observer, the distance will no longer be 60 meters.

However, no physicist in the world has said this stupidity,

Dr. Hachel has made a grievous misstatement.

and everyone agrees that it only affects transverse movements.

Au contraire.  Length contraction (LC) only affects distances along the
direction of motion, not transverse to it.
This is why I said, "Dr. Hachel should study the simpler relativistic
situations, which he has shown that he does not understand."

It is obvious, on the diagram, that the distance will remain the
same for the two observers (I mean between the two horizontal
parallels formed by the movement of the second observer
and the movement of the cube relative to him).
>
R.H.

Patently false.  The Lorentz transform, which Poincaré agreed with,
says otherwise.  If Dr. Hachel understood, he would know that LC is
one side of the coin of nonsimultaneity and time dilation is the
other side.  SR is quite consistent and doesn't need Dr. H's confusing
ramblings.