Re: Oh my God!

On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 1:21:59 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

>
Le 28/09/2024 à 03:10, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :

>
On Sat, 28 Sep 2024 0:23:18 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

>

Vo=Vr/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²)
>
If Vr---> ∞  then Vo=c

>
It doesn't take a degree in mathematics to know that as Vr---> ∞,
Vo in your equation approaches zero, not c.

>
In France, our experts in mathematics seem to say that
Vo=Vr/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²) tends towards c.

>
I can only see what I see, and I doubt you are being honest.
>
Don't quote yourself as an "expert" in mathematics because you're
not.  Neither are you an expert in relativity.

>
 Pffffff...
>
 Well...
>
 You say that the equation does not tend to c if Vr is infinite.
>
Let's take Vr very large, example Vr=1000c
>
Let's set Vo=Vr/sqrt(1+Vr²/c²)
>
Vo=1000c/sqrt(1+1000²)
>
Vo=(1000/1000.0005)c=0.9999995c
>
And the higher you go, the more it tends to c.
>
R.H.

I'm sorry, I didn't recognize the Vr in the numerator as
being the same as that in the denominator.
As I see now, the equation is actually quite similar to the
equation for tachyon momentum: p = mv/sqrt(v^2/c^2 - 1),
which follows from extending SR into the new domain of v > c.
So, it seems, that you are supporting tachyons while trying
to deny them :-)