Re: [SR] Dismaying intellectual desert?

Den 31.03.2024 14:23, skrev Richard Hachel:

Le 31/03/2024 à 14:07, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :

Den 30.03.2024 14:31, skrev Richard Hachel:

 

SR is a consistent theory.

 No.

SR is mathematical consistent. Indisputable fact!

 She is inconsistent and ridiculous in front of a simple doctor (me)
who tells him that there is a Langevin paradox and that no one for 120 years has succeeded in solving it.

That some simple doctor (you) finds the predictions of SR ridiculous
doesn't make SR inconsistent,  it only demonstrates that the simple
doctor (you) is ignorant of elementary math and physics.
Einstein 'solved' the twin paradox in 1905. Didn't you know?
"If one of two synchronous clocks at A is moved in a closed curve
  with constant velocity until it returns to A, the journey lasting
  t seconds, then by the clock which has remained at rest the
  travelled clock on its arrival at A will be t⋅v²/2c² seconds slow."
(The exact result is Δt = t⋅(1−√(1 −v²/c²)), but as explained in
  the  paper: √(1 − v²/c²)) ≈ (1 - v²/2c²) when v²/c² << 1)
Here is another example:
https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByMetric.pdf
https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByDoppler.pdf
SR predicts that the travelling
twin will age slower, which is experimentally confirmed.
No mystery, no paradox.
Here is the experimental confirmation:
https://paulba.no/paper/Hafele_Keating.pdf
https://paulba.no/pdf/H&K_like.pdf
The "twin" that travels around the Earth in the eastward
direction ages less than the 'twin' that travels in the westwards
direction, because the speed of the former is higher than the speed
of the latter, both speeds measured in the non-rotating Earth centred
frame of reference.

 It is common knowledge that one can only respond to him with hatred and insult.

One has only pointed out that his theory is experimentally falsified.
If he perceives that as hatred and insult, it's his problem.

Which is NOT scientific.

Experimental falsification of a theory is indeed scientific.
The following is an interesting study of his mind! :-D

Special Relativity is incapable of approving what Richard Hachel says, and can only always, always, always lower its pants, which is NOT NORMAL.
 If Richard Hachel says: "Stella's time is 9 years for the return", are the physicists in their pants? And why? Because it's false? No way! Because it's true, and they know it, and they teach it, but it would hurt them to admit it.
 If Richard Hachel says: "The apparent speed of an object moving at 0.8c, it is 4c, if the object is moving towards me". They answer: "No, we know it's true, but if you say it, because you're scum, they'll say it's not true."
 All this enters into madness on their part, but into the most intelligent of madness, that of hatred and massive refutation.
 All this to block the way for anyone who says: “Hachel is right, and 9*4=36”.
 It is to say the opposite which is inconsistent.
 It's a stupid cock contest.
 “We don’t want this man to rule over us.”
 It's very Freudian, even on the scale of the biggest names in world science.
>

BTW, Richard.
Physicists (and astronomers) are well aware of the fact that when
matter is approaching you at high speed, then the speed may appear
to be faster than c. It doesn't happen if the matter is moving right
at you along the line of sight, because then it is impossible to
measure any speed.
But when it is approaching you at an angle, you can measure the
angular velocity, and when the distance is known, you can calculate
the apparent transverse velocity, which indeed may be higher than c.
This is a _very_ well known phenomenon, and I find it rather amusing
that you are so ignorant that you believe that physicists would deny
its existence.
I will repost something I wrote back in 2003.
It is about "superluminal jets" from galaxies, (look it up!)
an example of which you can see here:
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/phys200/lectures/superlum/m87jet_hst_big.jpg
Matter in the jets is moving at high speed.
As this matter ploughs through the intergalactic medium (very thin gas),
radiation - mostly at radio frequencies - is emitted. It is this
radiation and not the matter itself that is observed.
The stream of matter is however not very steady. It may be "blobs" of
matter in the jets which will be visible in the observed radiation.
These "blobs" are observed to move, and it is supposed that the matter
in the jets move with the same speed as the observed "blobs".
So what really is observed is the angular speed of these blobs,
from which you can calculate the transverse speed assuming you know
the distance to the source.
So let's do the calculations on a realistic case:
  O                                                  * galaxy
                            angle of jet from       A
                            line of sight = a      /
                                                  / jet
                                                 /
                                                B
The observed time interval between reception of light emitted from A
and B (distance L) will be:
t_o = L/v - L*cos(a)/c
The apparent _traverse_ speed will be the apparent _traverse_ distance
divided by this time interval:
v_app = L*sin(a)/t_o = v*sin(a)/(1 - (v/c)*cos(a))
Note that v_app > c when v > c/(sin(a)+cos(a))
Note also that since (sin(a)+cos(a)) > 1 for any a < pi/2, v_app can,
as long as the jet is moving towards the observer, be > c if v is
sufficiently close to c.
For example, if a = pi/4 the apparent traverse speed is superluminal
if v > ca. 0.7*c
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/