Relativistic definition

Here is a sentence from Dr. Hachel with which physicists do not agree at all.
It's a shame.
When an individual disagrees with another individual on a scientific theory or fact, it would be normal to ask the other party to sit down and explain why they are behaving in an outlandish-looking manner. , and why it "thinks differently".
This would be a proof of logic and human coherence.
"If two mobiles, one in simple Galilean movement,
the other in uniformly accelerated movement with a start at rest,
 cross an identical space, in identical observable times,
then their proper times will be equal."
Where does the physicists' error come from?
This comes from the confusion between two lines when they talk about accelerated frames of reference.
Let's take the drawing on the left. It represents the relationship between proper time, improper time, and distance traveled.
This is very simple.
We have Tr(tau) on the ordinate, x/c on the abscissa, and To represented by the red line.
<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?i6e6RaE0RxCNtGlAaSfIYZlkB2s@jntp/Data.Media:1>
The problem for physicists is that, on the other hand, they do not understand the drawing on the right, we always have Tr, x/c, and To.
But physicists confuse the length of the blue line (which they take to be To) with the red line.
They therefore consider the Tr/To ratio larger than it is. And if the value of To is correct for them, the value Tr is systematically lower, and false.
Please have a couple of cups of coffee and think a little about what I'm saying.
This will avoid comments from morons who don't know what they're talking about and say nonsense.
R.H.
--
 Direct access Nemo here --->  <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=i6e6RaE0RxCNtGlAaSfIYZlkB2s@jntp>