Re: Space-time interval (2)

Le 14/08/2024 à 14:54, M.D. Richard "stuffed-shirt Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Le 14/08/2024 à 14:36, Python a écrit :

Le 14/08/2024 à 14:25, Richard "stuffed-shirt Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :

Le 14/08/2024 à 06:25, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

>
Well, Richard, the GPS disproves your theory, because

>
Because it suddenly becomes real when it's
comfortable for a relativistic idiot.

>
What is very funny in the relationships that I would have had all my life with other men, and which consisted of an immense cock contest: "We do not want this man to reign over us", "My cock is bigger than yours, Hachel", "I prefer that we shut up rather than see your rat's snout", is that I am sometimes opposed to contradictory reproaches.

>
You should have noticed a common trait here. Whoever you've been
talking with there were at least one pompous imbecile involved.
>
(Hint: it's you)
>

And they say: "GPS contradicts your shitty doctrine".
>
Except that no, GPS proves that I am right.
>
No anisochrony, the speed of light becomes infinite.
>
And GPS ends its life in the dustbins of history.

>
The few times you've written about GPS on fr.sci.physique you've
only shown that you do not know at all how it works and pulled
out a bunch of idiotic fantasies out of nowhere. Like that
receivers contain an atomic clock (!!!) or that synchronization
was about a distant 4-d clock, etc.

 Yes, that's what I said.
We can't synchronize all the watches in our 3D universe.

This is nevertheless done (in ECI frame of reference when it
comes to GPS, or in Earth frame for airports as Paul tried,
in vain, to explain to you).
If a theory predict as impossible something that is actually
done, the theory is dead.

[snip incoherent babbling]

Did you find an atomic clock in your GPS receiver yet?