Re: Einstein cheated with his fraudulent derivation of Lorentz transforms

On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 21:53:26 +0000, Richard Hachel wrote:

Le 07/02/2025 à 20:17, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

Den 06.02.2025 22:59, skrev rhertz:

>

But you can't dispute the fact that the Lorentz transform
follows from the postulates of SR.

>
 Ouch!
>
 My translator translates SR as general relativity, I was wondering if
Paul had gone crazy.
He is indeed talking about SR, in fact.
So tutti va bene.
Lorentz transformations are established on the invariance of the speed
of
light, indeed.
More precisely on the invariance of its transverse velocity for any
observer placed in a given frame of reference.
I recall them here as given by Poincaré (in positive form):
x'=(x+v.t)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
y'=y
z'=y
t'=(t+xv/c²)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
>
 R.H.

I just realized the weirdest thing that Einstein wrote at the beginning
of Point 3, IF I ACCEPT that x'=x-vt is located IN THE FIXED FRAME K.
Observing the diagram, which looks like if it's a Galilean transform, I
realized that (YES OR YES) x' must be ahead of x. Otherwise the
experiment
is invalid.
But the problem I saw is that x' IS MOVING AHEAD OF x. The equation
x'=x-vt
says so.
So, the problem with x' infinitesimally small, as Einstein proposed,
imply
that it happens at time t=dx'/v + x/v or, directly  t=x/v.
But even dx' keep moving ahead of x, in order to verify x'=x-vt.
More yet, x' infinitesimally small means that x' has moved close to the
origin
of coordinates in the moving frame k.
And this last only x/v seconds.
QUOTE:
"If we place x' = x − vt, it is CLEAR that a point at rest in the system
k must
have a system of values x", y, z, INDEPENDENT OF TIME".
END QUOTE
This CONFUSING comment from Einstein, introducing x", is completely out
of place. He NEVER EVER used x" again.
This comment, previous to
We first define τ as a function of x', y, z, and t. To do this we have
to express in equations that τ is nothing else than the summary of the
data of clocks at rest in system k, which have been synchronized
according to the rule given in § 1.
QUOTE:
From the origin of system k let a ray be emitted at the time τ₀ along
the X-axis to x', and at the time τ₁ be reflected thence to the origin
of the coordinates, arriving there at the time τ₂; we then must have
1/2 (τ₀ + τ₂) = τ₁
END QUOTE
This is confusing as hell, even for the master of deception.
Nevertheless, the only way that the equation IS VERIFIED is
by measuring τ₀, τ₁, τ₂ IN THE MOVING FRAME k.
Otherwise, as I wrote in a former post, the FORCEFUL MIX of
variables in K and k to express τ₀, τ₁, τ₂ FAIL TO VERIFY
THE EQUATION  1/2(τ₀+τ₂)=τ₁.
I REPEAT, THEN. Einstein defined
τ₁ = τ₀ + x´/(c–v)
τ₂ = τ₀ + x´/(c–v)+ x´/(c+v) = τ₀ + 2c x'/(c²-v²)
In the simple case that τ₀=0, the above times FAIL TO VERIFY
/2(τ₀+τ₂)=τ₁.
So, the famous equation that paves his way to Lorentz transforms:
1/2 [τ(0,0,0,t) + τ(0,0,0,t + x'/(c-v) + x'/(c+v)] = τ[(x',0,0,t +
x'/(c-v)]
IS COMPLETELY WRONG, FALSE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THIS FRAUD.