Re: I dare to relativists to explain local time: t-vx/c²

On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 18:17:06 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

Den 04.10.2024 15:34, skrev rhertz:

<snip>
--------------------------------------------------------

A coordinate transform is:
t' = at + bx
x' = ct + dx
>
Do you think that the term "b" has another EXPLANATION,
EITHER WITH A PHYSICAL MEANING OR EVEN A METAPHYSICAL ONE,
than the terms a, c and d?

-------------------------------------------------------
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Translation:On_the_Principle_of_Doppler
Here are the linear transforms that Voigt managed:
VOIGT'S LINEAR TRANSFORMS HYPOTHESIS (Equations 2:
x by ξ = xm₁ + yn₁ + zp₁ - αt
y by η = xm₂ + yn₂ + zp₂ - βt
z by ζ = xm₃ + yn₃ + zp₃ - γt
t by τ = t - (ax + by + cz)
ARE YOU SO STUPID THAT CONFOUND INITIAL HYPOTHESIS WITH RESULTS?
This is the original Voigt's LOCAL TIME. Learn it for once, idiot.
τ = t - χ/ω² (x α₁ + y β₁ + z γ₁)  , Equation 13
Voigt used full 3D for waves propagation, hence the components x,y,z.
-------------------------------------------------------------
<snip>

There is no "local time" in SR.

ARE YOU BECOME, FINALLY, FULL RETARDED?? SHAME ON YOU!
This is the result of Einstein's plagiarism of Voigt and Lorentz, page 7
of the 1921 English translation:
τ = Φ(v)  β (t - vx/c²) ;  Φ(v) = 1 and β is the current γ factor.
AND THAT IS THE INFAMOUS LORENTZ LOCAL TIME!
Really, you are becoming more and more stupid with the years!
------------------------------------------------------------
IT COMES DIRECTLY FROM 1904 LORENTZ PAPER:
H.A. Lorentz, Electromagnetic phenomena in a system moving with any
velocity smaller than that of light
1904 ORIGINAL LORENTZ TRANSFORMS
x' = β x  ;  Lorentz Eq. 4
t' = t/β - β vx/c² ;  Lorentz Eq. 5 (HERE IS LOCAL TIME WITH ETHER)
Making  x = X - vt (Einstein did that, to get rid of ether)
t' = β (t - vX/c²)
x' = β (X - vt)
THE SAME CRAP THAT EINSTEIN USED ONE YEAR LATER.
------------------------------------------------------------

>
You can see what Lorentz meant by "local time" in chapter 3 here:
>
https://paulba.no/div/LTorigin.pdf
>
Quote:
"Lorentz called the t' coordinate ’local time’, as opposed to
  the t coordinate which was the ’absolute time’ inherited from Newton.
  But note that this ’local time’ is what it shown by local clocks,
  and it is the ’local time’ that can be measured.
  The ’absolute time’ t is unobservable."
>
Only an idiot would call a term in a coordinate transform "local time".
What is the term vt? "Local position"?
>
And only an idiot would claim that all physicists born after 1900
are frauds.
>
Don't you agree, Richard? :-D

-------------------------------------------------------------
Only a blind, deaf and stupid relativist like you deny WRITTEN HISTORY!
Here is what Lorentz wrote about "local time" in his 1904 paper (p.813):
************************************
"The variabie t' may be called the "local time"; indeed, tor k = 1,
1 = 1 it becomes identical with what I have formerly understood by
this name,"
***********************************
DID YOU GET IT, IGNORANT?
GTFO!