What Python doesn't understand.
Python firmly believes that in any case, two observers following
different spatio-temporal "paths" cannot have the same proper time.
I explained to him that yes, by affirming that if two observers traveled equal distances, with equal times their own times would be equal (under
the condition that the departure of the accelerated traveler is at
rest). Python categorically refuses to drink this kind of milk, because
he "didn't learn SR like that."
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same time, it
goes without saying that the improper times will be equal. This is the
very definition of logical thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
However, I am the one who is right.
You simply use Minkowski's metric and I use Hachel's.
One of us is therefore wrong about the proper times of accelerated
objects. Bigger for Hachel, smaller for you and Paul.
Experimentation will necessarily prove me right due to my theoretical consistency (yours is incoherent in its latest equations).
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same time,
it goes without saying that the improper times will be equal. This is
the very definition of logical thinking.
Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT
a logical way of thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument.
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:01, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same time,
it goes without saying that the improper times will be equal. This is
the very definition of logical thinking.
Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT
a logical way of thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument.
BTW, read what Poincare wrote about non
euclidean geometries in "science and
hypothesis"
poor stinker
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:10, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:01, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same
time, it goes without saying that the improper times will be equal.
This is the very definition of logical thinking.
Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT
a logical way of thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument.
BTW, read what Poincare wrote about non
euclidean geometries in "science and
hypothesis"
I did. We've already talked about that. Your point is wrong.
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:25, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:14, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:10, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:01, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same
time, it goes without saying that the improper times will be
equal. This is the very definition of logical thinking.
Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT >>>>> a logical way of thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument.
BTW, read what Poincare wrote about non
euclidean geometries in "science and
hypothesis"
I did. We've already talked about that. Your point is wrong.
Well, that's [snip profanities] lie, but
nothing [snip whining]
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics.relativity/c/09w_O2XOEik/m/IloTCV6JEgAJ
So no, it is not a lie.
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:14, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:10, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:01, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:47, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 00:08, Python a écrit :
As usual you've snipped my argument and do not even try to
address it (because you know that you can, I'd guess)
If two travelers leave at the same time, and arrive at the same
time, it goes without saying that the improper times will be equal.
This is the very definition of logical thinking.
Using as a condition something that is always true is definitely NOT
a logical way of thinking.
[snip repetition of the same babbling]
You refute violently because you have read Einstein and Minkowski.
I'm not using anything from SR, Einstein or Minkowski in my
argument.
BTW, read what Poincare wrote about non
euclidean geometries in "science and
hypothesis"
I did. We've already talked about that. Your point is wrong.
Well, that's [snip profanities] lie, but
nothing [snip whining]
What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 16:28, Python pisze:
So no, it is not a lie.
Of course it is.
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 22:34, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 17:58, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:01, Python a écrit :
What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
Obviously.
Note obvious at all as you use (my guess is voluntarily) the
Whatever you say - Poincare had enough wit
to understand how idiotic rejecting Euclid
would be, and he has written it clearly
enough for anyone able to read (even if not
clearly enough for you, poor stinker).
Le 20/07/2024 à 17:58, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:01, Python a écrit :
What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
Obviously.
Note obvious at all as you use (my guess is voluntarily) the
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:01, Python a écrit :
What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
Obviously.
Et tu veux prouver quoi?
Le 20/07/2024 à 22:50, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 20.07.2024 o 22:34, Python pisze:
Le 20/07/2024 à 17:58, M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 16:01, Python a écrit :
What you called above "equal distances" is equality of spacial
part of two trajectories. This is a frame dependent property.
Obviously.
Note obvious at all as you use (my guess is voluntarily) the
Whatever you say - Poincare had enough wit
to understand how idiotic rejecting Euclid
would be, and he has written it clearly
enough for anyone able to read (even if not
clearly enough for you, poor stinker).
Poincaré would kick your silly ass,
Cranks of your kind LOVES ambiguity.
Le 20/07/2024 à 22:34, Python a écrit :
Cranks of your kind LOVES ambiguity.
Sniffff...
What you just said is very mean, snifff...
All my life, I have hated ambiguities and abstract terms, especially if
they are used to deceive men, sniffff...
Le 21/07/2024 à 00:05, Richard Hachel a écrit :
Le 20/07/2024 à 22:34, Python a écrit :
Cranks of your kind LOVES ambiguity.
Sniffff...
What you just said is very mean, snifff...
All my life, I have hated ambiguities and abstract terms, especially
if they are used to deceive men, sniffff...
This is actually quite interesting how you swiped from an expression
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 366 |
Nodes: | 16 (3 / 13) |
Uptime: | 06:49:41 |
Calls: | 7,826 |
Calls today: | 9 |
Files: | 12,930 |
Messages: | 5,769,248 |
Posted today: | 1 |