Re: The physics of [SR] still inconsistent

W dniu 07.08.2024 o 13:26, Python pisze:

Le 07/08/2024 à 12:57, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
As seen, the definition of second loved so
much to be invoked by relativistic [physicists] -
wasn't valid in the time when [Albert Einstein]
lived and [published]. Up to 1960 it was ordinary
1/86400 of a solar day, also in physics.
>
>
Now: an observer moving with c/2 wrt
solar system is measuring the length
of solar day. What is the result predicted
by the Einsteinian physics?
One prediction is - 99766. From the
postulates. The second prediction is -
86400. From definition.

 If the observer brings his own co-moving copy of the Solar System he

Physicists of 1905 were idiots, sure,
but not in your scale and their definition
does not include your delusional madness.
It is simple 1/86400 of a [solar] day -
making the mumble of  your idiot guru
not even consistent.
Similarly (thanks for correction) with
the meridian. Sorry, poor stinker.