• #### Cretin crank Richard Hertz perseveres

From Dono.@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Fri Sep 29 20:13:08 2023
On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 4:23:29 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

1) End B passes by origin x = 0. Clock tB = clock t = 0.
2) End A passes by the origin x = 0. Clock tA = clock t = 0, BUT clock tB is running L/v seconds ahead of tA = t = 0.
This problem has no solution, unless A COMPUTERIZED SYSTEM sets clock A = L/v, which is EXACTLY the time t. So NO RESET!

Dumbestfuck,

The problem has had a solution, since 1905 but you are too dumb to learn it. Instead, you keep showcasing your utter imbecility. Keep it up, dumbestfuck.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Dono. on Fri Sep 29 21:27:27 2023
On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 12:13:11 AM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
On Friday, September 29, 2023 at 4:23:29 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

1) End B passes by origin x = 0. Clock tB = clock t = 0.
2) End A passes by the origin x = 0. Clock tA = clock t = 0, BUT clock tB is running L/v seconds ahead of tA = t = 0.
This problem has no solution, unless A COMPUTERIZED SYSTEM sets clock A = L/v, which is EXACTLY the time t. So NO RESET!

Dumbestfuck,

The problem has had a solution, since 1905 but you are too dumb to learn it. Instead, you keep showcasing your utter imbecility. Keep it up, dumbestfuck.

Hey Dono!

Welcome back from under the rock you were hiding near hell!

Now that you spat your poison and reaffirmed your cretinism, you can crawl back to under that hot rock.

truthful power of elementary mathematics, logic and critical thinking.

You fail miserably at the last two abilities because you are a cretin gypsy. Not that's something wrong with that.

It's the way God made you, so you can barely survive in this world, Adrian.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hachel@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 30 11:54:06 2023
Le 30/09/2023 à 09:56, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
Den 29.09.2023 20:21, skrev Laurence Clark Crossen:
He said the moving frame of reference can have only one clock.
What was he hiding?
If more than one clock is used in the moving frame, they go out of
synchronization with each other due to the LT.
That is, the clocks within one IRF go out of sync with each other.

Nonsense.

https://paulba.no/pdf/Mutual_time_dilation.pdf

The primum movens of the theory of relativity is the notion of the
relativity of simultaneity.

What is particularly astonishing is that all of humanity seems to have
missed this obvious fact.

Physicists have understood very well one of the visible consequences experimentally of this phenomenon, that is to say the notion of relativity
of chronotropy by change of inertial frame of reference.

But NOT the primum movens, although much simpler to understand.

This incomprehension calls for others: the Langevin paradox which they
have never been able to really resolve (all the descriptions proposed are fakes), the incredible confusions of the equations proposed in the
accelerated relativistic frames of reference, etc...

For years I have been advising physicists to take baby steps in their
concepts and be careful about what they say.

In vain...

The way they think they can synchronize their clocks is one of the
greatest intellectual catastrophes in human history.

I remind you that in the end, with all these deviations we end up with

Example of a very important equation, but completely unknown to physicists because of this blindness that I deplore. It concerns the instantaneous observable speed (Voi) of an accelerated body as a function of its own and constant acceleration and the distance traveled.

Voi/c = [1+c²/ax]^(-1/2)

This is much less than physicists assume.

Paul B. Andersen, who is not a moron, who is not a bandit, who is not a
thug, will respond with absolute sincerity:
"But no! We must find the time observable at point B, subtract the time observable at point A, and set Vo=AB/To2-To1"

We then find a much more impressive speed than what I am proposing.

The problem is that no one sees the terrible stumbling blocks of
physicists.

They thoughtlessly subtract T01 from To2 as if it were self-evident.

Except that To1 is measured by one watch, and To2 is measured by another, placed elsewhere.

So we subtract a carrot from a turnip.

We then obtain very fanciful instantaneous speeds, as we also obtain very fanciful clean times.

I recall that the instantaneous speed of a rocket arriving at Tau Ceti in
the problem of the same name is Vo=0.980c.

And not 0.997c.

I remind you that the passenger's life time will be 4,776 years, and not
3,564 years.

These predictive differences are colossal, and it is urgent to fully
understand their causes, and to verify experimentally that everything I
say is true.

R.H.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Richard Hachel on Sat Sep 30 06:00:34 2023
On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 13:54:09 UTC+2, Richard Hachel wrote:
Le 30/09/2023 à 09:56, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
Den 29.09.2023 20:21, skrev Laurence Clark Crossen:
He said the moving frame of reference can have only one clock.
What was he hiding?
If more than one clock is used in the moving frame, they go out of
synchronization with each other due to the LT.
That is, the clocks within one IRF go out of sync with each other.

Nonsense.

https://paulba.no/pdf/Mutual_time_dilation.pdf
The primum movens of the theory of relativity is the notion of the relativity of simultaneity.

What is particularly astonishing is that all of humanity seems to have missed this obvious fact.

Physicists have understood very well one of the visible consequences experimentally of this phenomenon

Physicist has gedanken/fabricated, and the mumble of
your idiot guru wasn't even consistent.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Laurence Clark Crossen@21:1/5 to Maciej Wozniak on Sat Sep 30 13:11:12 2023
On Saturday, September 30, 2023 at 6:00:36 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 13:54:09 UTC+2, Richard Hachel wrote:
Le 30/09/2023 à 09:56, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
Den 29.09.2023 20:21, skrev Laurence Clark Crossen:
He said the moving frame of reference can have only one clock.
What was he hiding?
If more than one clock is used in the moving frame, they go out of
synchronization with each other due to the LT.
That is, the clocks within one IRF go out of sync with each other.

Nonsense.

https://paulba.no/pdf/Mutual_time_dilation.pdf
The primum movens of the theory of relativity is the notion of the relativity of simultaneity.

What is particularly astonishing is that all of humanity seems to have missed this obvious fact.

Physicists have understood very well one of the visible consequences experimentally of this phenomenon
Physicist has gedanken/fabricated, and the mumble of
your idiot guru wasn't even consistent.
I think this issue calls into question Einstein's intelligence more than it does the LT's.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Dono.@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Sun Oct 8 16:49:48 2023
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 4:19:12 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year OR 0.103564055 arcsec/orbit.

Dumbestfuck

0.43 arcsec/year is the DIFFERENCE between the Newtonan prediction and the measured value. You have put your foot in your mouth once again.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Dono. on Sun Oct 8 19:31:49 2023
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 8:49:50 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

<snip>

Dumbestfuck

0.43 arcsec/year is the DIFFERENCE between the Newtonan prediction and the measured value. You have put your foot in your mouth once again.

Dyslexic imbecile, that was exactly my point since the OP. NASA

It seems that you persist with your old traits like a true shill, troll and stupid romanian gypsy. Never one true word written by you, cretin relativist.

JPL Horizons online database delivers results based on Kepler-Newton, not GR-PPN.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Dono.@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Sun Oct 8 19:37:28 2023
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:31:51 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 8:49:50 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:

<snip>
Dumbestfuck

0.43 arcsec/year is the DIFFERENCE between the Newtonan prediction and the measured value. You have put your foot in your mouth once again.
Dyslexic imbecile,

Nice new signature, Dick

that was exactly my point since the OP. NASA

You are not only an imbecile, you are an imbecile and a liar. Your sniped you own point, here it is again:

3) GR prediction: 0.43 arcsec/year

JPL Horizons online database delivers results based on Kepler-Newton, not GR-PPN.

You are lying. Again. Keep it up, dumbestfuck.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Richard Hertz@21:1/5 to Dono. on Sun Oct 8 19:50:12 2023
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:37:30 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:31:51 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

<snip>

JPL Horizons online database delivers results based on Kepler-Newton, not GR-PPN.
You are lying. Again. Keep it up, dumbestfuck.

I repeat my previous post. No lies, just pure data computed from JPL Horizons database.

I provided enough information so that an imbecile like you can do a fact-check, lazy dog.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Dono.@21:1/5 to Richard Hertz on Mon Oct 9 07:22:12 2023
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:50:14 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:37:30 PM UTC-3, Dono. wrote:
On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 7:31:51 PM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:
<snip>
JPL Horizons online database delivers results based on Kepler-Newton, not GR-PPN.
You are lying. Again. Keep it up, dumbestfuck.
I repeat my previous post.

Repeating the same idiocy doesn't make it true, it just make you douly idiotic.