Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
W dniu 23.09.2024 o 14:51, Richard Hachel pisze:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of
a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
It's just that - while wild multiplying frames of
reference in galilean physics was stupid -
Le 23/09/2024 à 15:05, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 23.09.2024 o 14:51, Richard Hachel pisze:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of
a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
It's just that - while wild multiplying frames of
reference in galilean physics was stupid -
:-D
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of a
frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Undefined entities:
d=15
t=0 (perception)
sin a= 0.6
cos a = 0.8
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
d=15
t=0 (perception)
sin a= 0.6
cos a = 0.8
Le 23/09/2024 à 19:51, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of
a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Please pay attention to Hachel notations.
Den 23.09.2024 20:02, skrev Richard Hachel:
Le 23/09/2024 à 19:51, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates
of a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame
of reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Please pay attention to Hachel notations.
I have made the transformation of the coordinates
of an event from R to R' as you asked for.
Den 23.09.2024 20:02, skrev Richard Hachel:
Le 23/09/2024 à 19:51, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates of >>>> a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame of
reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Please pay attention to Hachel notations.
I have made the transformation of the coordinates
of an event from R to R' as you asked for.
Case closed.
W dniu 24.09.2024 o 13:06, Paul.B.Andersen pisze:
Den 23.09.2024 20:02, skrev Richard Hachel:
Le 23/09/2024 à 19:51, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates
of a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame
of reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Please pay attention to Hachel notations.
I have made the transformation of the coordinates
of an event from R to R' as you asked for.
Stella and Terrence, Bob and Alice may produce
their coordinate sets magically, it's easy
in fabricated tales. In the real world -
generating a reliable set of coordinates
is a serious task. We don't really have even
1 (one) real set of coordinates valid for
your precious transformations.
...
I repeat that Hachel's relativity
is very simple mathematically (college level)
Le 24/09/2024 à 14:02, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
W dniu 24.09.2024 o 13:06, Paul.B.Andersen pisze:
Den 23.09.2024 20:02, skrev Richard Hachel:
Le 23/09/2024 à 19:51, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :
Den 23.09.2024 14:51, skrev Richard Hachel:
Poincaré-Lorentz transformations transpose the present coordinates >>>>>> of a frame of reference R to the homologous coordinates in a frame >>>>>> of reference R'.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15
If the frame R'(t',x',y',x') move along the x axis in
the frame R(t,x,z,y) at the speed 0.8c,
Then the event with the coordinates
t = -15 y, x = 12 ly, y = 9 ly z = 0 ly in frame R
Will have the following coordinates in frame R'
t' = - 41 y, x' = 40 ly, y' = 9 ly, z' = 0 ly
Please pay attention to Hachel notations.
I have made the transformation of the coordinates
of an event from R to R' as you asked for.
Stella and Terrence, Bob and Alice may produce
their coordinate sets magically, it's easy
in fabricated tales. In the real world -
generating a reliable set of coordinates
is a serious task. We don't really have even
1 (one) real set of coordinates valid for
your precious transformations.
This is not magic, nor invented tales.
The theory of relativity is today an obvious theory
Le 24/09/2024 à 14:31, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
...
I repeat that Hachel's relativity
There is no "Hachel's Relativity", there is a bunch of nonsense, misunderstandings and contradictions.
W dniu 24.09.2024 o 15:53, Python pisze:
Le 24/09/2024 à 14:31, Richard "Hachel" Lengrand a écrit :
...
I repeat that Hachel's relativity
There is no "Hachel's Relativity", there is a bunch of nonsense,
misunderstandings and contradictions.
Sounds exactly like relativity.
[boring stupid stuff]
poor stinker
"college level" in English relates to University level, not
what you meant which is Secondary School (in UK) or Middle
School or Junior High School in the U.S.A.
x=12
y=9
z=0
To=-15 (event in M-type synchro)
d=15
t=0 (perception)
sin a= 0.6
cos a = 0.8
Le 24/09/2024 à 15:53, Python a écrit :
"college level" in English relates to University level, not
what you meant which is Secondary School (in UK) or Middle
School or Junior High School in the U.S.A.
Possible.
Sinon, j'attends toujours que tu m'expliques ton histoire de machins sur
les vitesses apparentes.
J'ai proposé à d'autres intervenants de m'expliquer, mais ils se sont
tous enfuis.
Doivent encore moins comprendre que moi.
Le 24/09/2024 à 22:08, Python a écrit :
Quite the opposite. They don't need hints to know you are talking
shit. By the way you should (you won't) think about the comparison
with a siren on an ambulance going forth and back. I'll post about
this soon, but you may want to find by yourself.
The sound Doppler effect is interesting, but well... Once again, you're
going to waste your time.
You're going to show that the Doppler effect explanation works, and
nothing more: you're not going to get to the bottom of things.
But you're not going to show why it works, because you take my equations
for total crap, despite their logic and mathematical beauty that even Einstein or Poincaré didn't have.
But FUCK, that's not what's important, it's not your watermelon that's
going to synchronize the watches, it's not your ambulance siren, but we
don't care about all that.
That's not the important thing.
The important thing is to understand that the notion of a relativistic
frame of reference is biased if we apply it to anything other than the observer himself.
The important thing is to understand that since each observer has his
own relativistic hyperplane of simultaneity, it is mandatory to go
through it to correctly and perfectly describe things.
The important thing is to understand that if we practice like this, for
any observer, there is a perfect fluidity of times for all observers,
and that talking about gap-time is particularly stupid.
What physicists do is stupid. They calculate time in the forward frame
of reference (measured by a point M and its synchronization) then in the return frame of reference (with another point M' also placed on the
normal but from another incredibly different frame of reference M').
Realizing that we cannot add the return and return times, they invent a tiem-gap that has absolutely no place in my home (which allows you to
insult me when you have understood NOTHING, once again).
I have referred you dozens of times to nemo.physics where you will find
the perfect description of what is happening.
Such a description should make you think, after drinking two or three
cups of coffee, maybe you will have the tilt, the mathematical
illumination.
The perfection, the coherence and the beauty of the whole thing far
exceeds all the bullshit invented by Minkowski and those who followed
him, including the idiot Albert Einstein.
So if you want to show yourself up to it:
1. Study what I say without acting like a monkey.
2. Realize that it is as mind-blowing as no one has ever mind-blowed the theory (to better re-mind it)
3. Show that you have balls and attack scientific public opinion by
telling them that you have understood and validated something
that they will never be able to understand if you do not help them.
And stop with your watermelons and your ambulances, it is grotesque.
Go into the depth and clarity of things.
With your ambulances, you will never be able to make them understand
that the road on which the ambulance is driving is a reference mollusk,
and that it is no longer the same depending on the speed.
They will never be able to understand that if there are twelve km to go,
the ambulance will have to travel thirty-six, and that those who call me
a monkey without having understood the beauty and logic of reasoning
(see my little comics on Nemo) are themselves arrogant monkeys,
criticizing a stroke of genius that they have not even understood and
that they cannot even explain.
R.H.
Complete madness, oh God !
I'll post the ambulance-siren comparison though.
Quite the opposite. They don't need hints to know you are talking
shit. By the way you should (you won't) think about the comparison
with a siren on an ambulance going forth and back. I'll post about
this soon, but you may want to find by yourself.
Am Dienstag000024, 24.09.2024 um 22:43 schrieb Richard Hachel:
Le 24/09/2024 à 22:08, Python a écrit :
Quite the opposite. They don't need hints to know you are talking
shit. By the way you should (you won't) think about the comparison
with a siren on an ambulance going forth and back. I'll post about
this soon, but you may want to find by yourself.
The sound Doppler effect is interesting, but well... Once again,
you're going to waste your time.
You're going to show that the Doppler effect explanation works, and
nothing more: you're not going to get to the bottom of things.
But you're not going to show why it works, because you take my
equations for total crap, despite their logic and mathematical beauty
that even Einstein or Poincaré didn't have.
But FUCK, that's not what's important, it's not your watermelon that's
going to synchronize the watches, it's not your ambulance siren, but
we don't care about all that.
That's not the important thing.
The important thing is to understand that the notion of a relativistic
frame of reference is biased if we apply it to anything other than the
observer himself.
The important thing is to understand that since each observer has his
own relativistic hyperplane of simultaneity, it is mandatory to go
through it to correctly and perfectly describe things.
This hyperplane of the present is always perpendicular to the axis of
time and time is a local measure.
'perpendicular' means here (in a complex plane) a multiplication by i
(the sqrt(-1)).
So time is an imaginary (pseudo-) scalar, if you regard the axes x, y
and z as real.
If we place the observer in the center of the coordinate system, the
axis of local time becomes perpendicular to the hyperplane of the present.
This is valid for all observers everywhere.
From this would follow, that time MUST be local and is not always 'parallel'.
Le 24/09/2024 à 22:08, Python a écrit :
Quite the opposite. They don't need hints to know you are talking
shit. By the way you should (you won't) think about the comparison
with a siren on an ambulance going forth and back. I'll post about
this soon, but you may want to find by yourself.
The sound Doppler effect is interesting, but well... Once again, you're
going to waste your time.
You're going to show that the Doppler effect explanation works, and
nothing more: you're not going to get to the bottom of things.
But you're not going to show why it works, because you take my equations
for total crap, despite their logic and mathematical beauty that even Einstein or Poincaré didn't have.
But FUCK, that's not what's important, it's not your watermelon that's
going to synchronize the watches, it's not your ambulance siren, but we
don't care about all that.
That's not the important thing.
The important thing is to understand that the notion of a relativistic
frame of reference is biased if we apply it to anything other than the observer himself.
The important thing is to understand that since each observer has his
own relativistic hyperplane of simultaneity, it is mandatory to go
through it to correctly and perfectly describe things.
This hyperplane of the present is always perpendicular to the axis of
time and time is a local measure.
If we place the observer in the center of the coordinate system, the
axis of local time becomes perpendicular to the hyperplane of the present.
This is valid for all observers everywhere.
From this would follow, that time MUST be local and is not always 'parallel'.
This is actually different to usual concepts in physics, which usually
assume time to be universal.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 366 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 07:17:06 |
Calls: | 7,826 |
Calls today: | 9 |
Files: | 12,930 |
Messages: | 5,769,257 |
Posted today: | 1 |