Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #584946

Re: Annotated version of SRT

Show all headers | View raw

On Saturday, May 7, 2022 at 11:22:14 PM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 07.05.2022 um 09:38 schrieb JanPB: 
> 
> >>>> I take this quote of Einstein from page 6: 
> >>>> 
> >>>> "...a point at rest in the system k must have a system of values x', y, 
> >>>> z, independent of time. " 
> >>>> 
> >>>> This 'point at rest in k' is called (xsi, 0, 0) in k-coordinates, where 
> >>>> xsi is a fixed but otherwise arbitrary value. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> In four-vector form in K this point has the four-vector 
> >>>> (xsi- v*t, 0, 0, t) 
> >>> 
> >>> It was explained to you many times that your reasoning is incorrect. 
> >>> So I won't repeat the correct argument again. 
> >> Ok, you're right, because it should say x= xsi+ v*t, of course. 
> > 
> > No, this is also incorrect.
> WHAT is incorrect?

The formula  "x= xsi+ v*t" is incorrect.  It describes nothing, it's like
writing "2+2=5".

> >>>> which is not independent of time. 
> >>> 
> >>> Not even wrong. 
> >> No, because 'independent of time' means 'its equation had a constant 
> >> value for time or no timer component at all'. 
> >> 
> >> But x= xsi+ v*t contains t, which is not a constant. 
> > 
> > You are running in circles. It's all incorrect. 
> > 
> >>>> It cannot be independent of time, 
> >>> 
> >>> It doesn't matter. You base this on an incorrect assumption, so 
> >>> naturally you end up with a piece of nonsense. 
> >> Would you be so kind and tell me, which assumption is wrong? 
> > 
> > Your entire understanding of both the experimental setup and how 
> > the K-coordinates are used to track it is wrong.
> I take ONLY the actual text as meaningful, not any other unmentioned 
> material. 

No, you are not taking the actual text as meaningful, you are
inventing stuff that's not there. You are throwing away what
Einstein wrote and replacing it with your own content (which happens
to be nonsensical).

> The text itself is, what I'm talking about. Therefore you 
> cannot use any other material, which is not explicitly quoted within the 
> text. 

Of course I can - this is what the entire notion of "explaining" is about.
You got confused by the x'-notation so I supplied the steps Einstein omits
(because they are elementary).

> So: what Einstein wrote is valid (as his intention), not what you think 
> he should have written. 

No, this is a silly, science doesn't work that way. To the intended audience
the text was (and is) very clear. There is no "what I think he should
have written" element in it.

Here is what your reasoning is:

(1) "I am right,"

(2) "And if anyone tries to explain anything to me, their argument doesn't
count  because they use different words than Einstein".

Of course by that sort of "reasoning" you can prove anything about anything.

> That's why you need to prove your claim by a quote from Einstein's text. 

One cannot "quote from Einstein text" the steps that Einstein (intentionally)
omits. Again: one does not include elementary explanations in a science 
research paper. It's just not done. It's been that way for a very long time 
(centuries) and it remains true today.

> This text does in fact contain an 'experimental setup', even if 
> Einstein's text is hard to understand. 

Maybe it is to some. But not because of the lack of elementary detail which
is the norm. 

> Now we are still discussing the question, how Einstein's words should be 
> understood. 
> 
> We have here a simple situation: a beam is sent out by some source and 
> reflected back to its origin. 
> 
> The question is now: which variables belong to which quantities. 
> 
> This should not be a subject to debate in a good paper, but is in this case. 

It's not an object of debate among the intended audience of the paper.
The text admits only one interpretation.

> I interpreted the setup this way: 
> 
> the emitter is placed in the zero spot of k at point xsi_0 

At the point  ksi_0 = 0.

> the mirror is placed at some positive distance at the point xsi_mirror in k 

OK.

> the hole thing moves in K to 'the right' with velocity v 

OK.

> the moving setup is watched and measured from K with measures from K 

OK.

> Now k is a copy of K, which 'slides' along the x-axis of K with velocity v. 

OK, except for the bizarre phrase "a copy of K".

> this allows to define the points xsi_0 and xsi_mirror from the 
> perspective of K with K-coordinates: 
> 
> x'= x(xsi_mirror)=xsi_mirror + v*t 

No, this is wrong. If you want to express the light source and mirror
situation through the measurements made by  K,  then you can only
use K-coordinates (no ksi).

OTOH if you want to express  ksi  in terms of  K-coordinates, then you
have to derive that relationship first (as Einstein does a bit later). You
cannot just assume some random formula like "x'= x(xsi_mirror)=xsi_mirror + v*t"
(you are confusing the actual physical positions with *coordinate values*.
I understand what your intent is but you are expressing it in a mathematically
nonsensical manner.

> x(xsi_0)= x_0 + v*t
> >> I see a VERY simple equation, which is not independet of time: 
> >> (x= xsi+ v*t) 
> > 
> > This equation is incorrect.
> that is like saying 
> 1+1=2 is incorrect. 

No, it's like saying "I live on the 30th floor because I put a sign
on my door that says "30th Floor"".

> you need to say, at least, what is incorrect any why.

I (and others) have stated it many times. You are presuming a
relationship between  K  and  k  coordinates that had not
been established yet. 

> >> while Einstein wrote, it would be independent of time. 
> > 
> > Einstein has a different equation (which I explained in full detail twice).
> I wrote, several times now, that Einstein's equation was wrong.

It's not wrong. Your understanding of it is.

--
Jan

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-29 08:22 +0200
  Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 12:52 +0000
    Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 13:06 +0000
      Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-29 06:47 -0700
    Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-01 09:59 +0200
      Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 12:16 +0000
        Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-02 08:03 +0200
          Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-01 23:31 -0700
            Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 08:56 +0000
              Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 02:30 -0700
          Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 00:18 -0700
            Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-04 06:53 +0200
              Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-04 01:02 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-05 09:02 +0200
                Crank Thomas Heger keeps on lying "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 06:38 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 22:17 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-05 22:34 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-06 08:55 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 00:24 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 01:15 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-06 01:41 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-07 07:19 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 00:38 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-08 08:22 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-08 12:33 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-10 07:12 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-10 00:19 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-11 07:55 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-11 11:25 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-12 07:39 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-12 10:31 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-12 21:05 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-15 11:26 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-12 11:33 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-12 21:28 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-13 08:41 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-14 06:43 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-14 19:49 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-15 08:34 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-15 12:53 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-14 19:29 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-15 08:50 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-06 17:09 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-07 07:32 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-07 13:53 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-07 05:10 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-08 08:33 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-08 12:34 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-09 07:20 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 02:24 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 03:04 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2022-05-09 10:14 +0300
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-09 00:25 -0700
          Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 11:16 +0000
            Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 04:44 -0700
              Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 12:02 +0000
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-02 05:11 -0700
            Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-05-03 08:15 +0200

csiph-web