• How does science measure relative motion over absolute?

    From mitchrae3323@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 21 10:36:09 2023
    how does science measure their difference?
    if you label light as absolute and atom relative
    how come the atom can compete with light's
    speed? at a motion BH? or the atom moving
    at near light speed leaving light behind?
    If they compete why are they not the same?
    relativity is an assumption... how is absolute
    speed having evidence against it?

    Mitchell Raemsch

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to mitchr...@gmail.com on Mon Aug 21 14:43:57 2023
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?

    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which can
    only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system. Nobody has
    ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute velocity", or how to identify any "absolute frame or coordinates".

    [Some people claim the "fixed stars" determine an
    "absolute frame"; others claim the CMBR does so.
    Neither one deserves that title, as neither one
    spans the visible universe; both are as local as
    the rest frame of the Milky Way.]

    if you label light as absolute and atom relative

    Then you are misusing terminology and obtaining nonsense.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Mon Aug 21 13:26:42 2023
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:44:09 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?
    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which can
    only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system. Nobody has
    ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute velocity", or how to identify any "absolute frame or coordinates".

    Interesting. And yet the LTs as much as proclaim relativity velocity as an absolute scaler by eradicating any possibility of a coordinate relative velocity v'. Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper
    time t and proper distance x. Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ? Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ? Easy peasy.


    [Some people claim the "fixed stars" determine an
    "absolute frame"; others claim the CMBR does so.
    Neither one deserves that title, as neither one
    spans the visible universe; both are as local as
    the rest frame of the Milky Way.]
    if you label light as absolute and atom relative
    Then you are misusing terminology and obtaining nonsense.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mitchrae3323@gmail.com@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Mon Aug 21 17:04:55 2023
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:44:09 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?
    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which can

    Then how do you know the difference?

    only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system. Nobody has
    ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute velocity",

    How do you know you have measured the relative?
    Frames converge and diverge equally. That is absolute
    speed measured. Einstein believed not it the velocity
    of light but in its speed math.

    Mitchell Raemsch



    [Some people claim the "fixed stars" determine an
    "absolute frame"; others claim the CMBR does so.
    Neither one deserves that title, as neither one
    spans the visible universe; both are as local as
    the rest frame of the Milky Way.]
    if you label light as absolute and atom relative
    Then you are misusing terminology and obtaining nonsense.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to patdolan on Tue Aug 22 10:37:53 2023
    On 8/21/23 3:26 PM, patdolan wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:44:09 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?
    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which
    can only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system.
    Nobody has ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute
    velocity", or how to identify any "absolute frame or coordinates".

    Interesting. And yet the LTs as much as proclaim relativity
    velocity as an absolute scaler by eradicating any possibility of a
    coordinate relative velocity v'. Coordinate time t' and coordinate
    distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper time t and
    proper distance x. Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go
    with proper relative velocity v ? Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    Easy peasy.

    I have no way to respond to your word salad -- your wording simply does
    not make sense. You need to learn basic physics and its vocabulary
    before you can think about this, much less write about it.

    Tom Roberts

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Tue Aug 22 09:57:34 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:38:06 AM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 3:26 PM, patdolan wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:44:09 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?
    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which
    can only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system.
    Nobody has ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute
    velocity", or how to identify any "absolute frame or coordinates".

    Interesting. And yet the LTs as much as proclaim relativity
    velocity as an absolute scaler by eradicating any possibility of a coordinate relative velocity v'. Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper time t and proper distance x. Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go
    with proper relative velocity v ? Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    Easy peasy.
    I have no way to respond to your word salad -- your wording simply does
    not make sense. You need to learn basic physics and its vocabulary
    before you can think about this, much less write about it.

    Tom Roberts
    Truly Tom Roberts, I do sympathize with your situation. What I have typed must be mind-blowing gibberish to you and your ilk. But I assure you, my words could be generated by any rational and circumspect mind. They are comprehendible to anyone who did
    not drink the Kool-aid in adolescence. Well...actually I did drink it. But I began a rigorous Cartesian doubt project of relativity just after completing my Cartesian doubt project of Evolution.

    You are too old, Tom Roberts, too old to be saved. I'm sorry, but that's just the way it works. I can no longer offer you instruction at your age; only sympathetic reproof:

    Said the fool to Lear "Thou shouldst not have been old til thou hadst been wise."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Tue Aug 22 09:29:40 2023
    On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 17:38:06 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 3:26 PM, patdolan wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:44:09 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
    On 8/21/23 12:36 PM, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
    how does science measure their difference?
    It doesn't. In physics, "motion" is replaced by "velocity", which
    can only be measured relative to a specified coordinate system.
    Nobody has ever described how to measure any sort of "absolute
    velocity", or how to identify any "absolute frame or coordinates".

    Interesting. And yet the LTs as much as proclaim relativity
    velocity as an absolute scaler by eradicating any possibility of a coordinate relative velocity v'. Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper time t and proper distance x. Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go
    with proper relative velocity v ? Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    Easy peasy.
    I have no way to respond to your word salad -- your wording simply does
    not make sense. You need to learn basic physics

    You need to learn that you're FORCED!!! To the BEST WAY!!!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill@21:1/5 to patdolan on Tue Aug 22 16:56:23 2023
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper time t and proper distance x.

    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].

    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?

    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity
    between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 23 01:14:58 2023
    Le 23/08/2023 à 01:56, Bill a écrit :
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.

    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].

    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v
    ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?

    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.

    Are we really sure that the time values that are used in the Lorentz transformations are coordinates?

    I don't think these are coordinates in the proper sense of the word.

    When using MY geometry the symbols x, y, and z are coordinates. I want to
    admit it.

    But on the other hand, To, To' are norms.

    R.H.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to Bill on Tue Aug 22 18:37:03 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity; and
    therefore a violation of the first postulate.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to patdolan on Tue Aug 22 18:59:45 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:56:11 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:37:06 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper
    time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given
    object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each
    coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity; and
    therefore a violation of the first postulate.
    Or put another way, Legion in S' and I in S will each measure the identical relative velocity for each other. But we will each disagree with the other's calculation based on what the LTs tell us the other *should* measure. (I may try yet a third way to
    explain this in a way that even Tom Roberts can understand)
    Let me put this way: We can write another version of the LTs, let's call them the DTs for arguments sake, in which t is always constant and it is v & x that have images v' & x' under the transforms. This is a very Einstein-esque thing to do. I may do
    it later tonight.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to patdolan on Tue Aug 22 18:56:09 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:37:06 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper
    time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each
    coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity; and
    therefore a violation of the first postulate.
    Or put another way, Legion in S' and I in S will each measure the identical relative velocity for each other. But we will each disagree with the other's calculation based on what the LTs tell us the other *should* measure. (I may try yet a third way to
    explain this in a way that even Tom Roberts can understand)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to patdolan on Wed Aug 23 08:04:43 2023
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:59:48 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:56:11 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:37:06 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper
    time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given
    object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1 to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each
    coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity;
    and therefore a violation of the first postulate.
    Or put another way, Legion in S' and I in S will each measure the identical relative velocity for each other. But we will each disagree with the other's calculation based on what the LTs tell us the other *should* measure. (I may try yet a third way
    to explain this in a way that even Tom Roberts can understand)
    Let me put this way: We can write another version of the LTs, let's call them the DTs for arguments sake, in which t is always constant and it is v & x that have images v' & x' under the transforms. This is a very Einstein-esque thing to do. I may do
    it later tonight.

    Lorentz Transforms--domain is over independent v
    f( x, t, v ) -> x'
    g( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-f( x', t', v ) -> x
    anti-g( x', t', v ) -> t

    Dolantz Transforms--domain is over independent x
    h( x, t, v ) -> v'
    k( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-h( x, t', v' ) -> v
    anti-k( x, t', v' ) -> t

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to patdolan on Wed Aug 23 08:10:50 2023
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:04:46 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:59:48 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:56:11 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:37:06 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper
    time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by
    sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given
    object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity
    between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1 to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each
    coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity;
    and therefore a violation of the first postulate.
    Or put another way, Legion in S' and I in S will each measure the identical relative velocity for each other. But we will each disagree with the other's calculation based on what the LTs tell us the other *should* measure. (I may try yet a third
    way to explain this in a way that even Tom Roberts can understand)
    Let me put this way: We can write another version of the LTs, let's call them the DTs for arguments sake, in which t is always constant and it is v & x that have images v' & x' under the transforms. This is a very Einstein-esque thing to do. I may do
    it later tonight.
    Lorentz Transforms--domain is over independent v
    f( x, t, v ) -> x'
    g( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-f( x', t', v ) -> x
    anti-g( x', t', v ) -> t

    Dolantz Transforms--domain is over independent x
    h( x, t, v ) -> v'
    k( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-h( x, t', v' ) -> v
    anti-k( x, t', v' ) -> t
    DT Theorem: for any pair of observers, the relative velocity and the time that each experiences/measures is differs from the other in just such a fashion so as to keep the distance between them a constant.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From patdolan@21:1/5 to patdolan on Wed Aug 23 08:54:57 2023
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:10:53 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:04:46 AM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:59:48 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:56:11 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 6:37:06 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 4:56:26 PM UTC-7, Bill wrote:
    On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 1:26:44 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote:
    Coordinate time t' and coordinate distance x' play their parts in the LTs
    along with proper time t and proper distance x.
    The symbols x,t denote coordinates, just as do the symbols x',t'. The proper
    time between two timelike-separated events e1 and e2 is given by sqrt[(t2-t1)^2 - (x2-x1)^2], and the same proper time is also given by
    sqrt[(t'2-t'1)^2 - (x'2-x'1)^2].
    Why not coordinate relativity velocity v' to go with proper relative velocity v ?
    Wouldn't that just be ∆x'/∆t' ?
    As explained to you before, you're confusing (1) the velocities of a given
    object in terms of two coordinates systems and (2) the mutual velocity
    between two coordinate systems. If an object moves uniformly from e1
    to e2 then its velocity in terms of the x,t coordinates is (x2-x1)/(t2-t1), and
    its velocity in terms of the x',t' coordinates is (x'2-x'1)/(t'2-t'1). These are
    generally different. However, the velocities of the spatial origins of each
    coordinate system in terms of the other are equal and reciprocal.
    And, according to you Legion, mutually exclusive. If the coordinate relative velocity v' does not stand on an equal footing with the proper relative velocity v then we have a "preferred" coordinate system in which to calculate relative velocity;
    and therefore a violation of the first postulate.
    Or put another way, Legion in S' and I in S will each measure the identical relative velocity for each other. But we will each disagree with the other's calculation based on what the LTs tell us the other *should* measure. (I may try yet a third
    way to explain this in a way that even Tom Roberts can understand)
    Let me put this way: We can write another version of the LTs, let's call them the DTs for arguments sake, in which t is always constant and it is v & x that have images v' & x' under the transforms. This is a very Einstein-esque thing to do. I may
    do it later tonight.
    Lorentz Transforms--domain is over independent v
    f( x, t, v ) -> x'
    g( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-f( x', t', v ) -> x
    anti-g( x', t', v ) -> t

    Dolantz Transforms--domain is over independent x
    h( x, t, v ) -> v'
    k( x, t, v ) -> t'
    anti-h( x, t', v' ) -> v
    anti-k( x, t', v' ) -> t
    DT Theorem: for any pair of observers, the relative velocity and the time that each experiences/measures is differs from the other in just such a fashion so as to keep the distance between them a constant.
    DT Theorem: for any pair of observers, the relative velocity and the time that each observer experiences/measures differs from the other observer in just such a manner so as to keep the distance between them constant.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mitchrae3323@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Wed Aug 23 09:35:57 2023
    What can take away length/distance?
    and why would it?


    Mitchell Raemsch

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)