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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #359808

Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

From Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY
Date 2015-08-06 22:56 +1000
Message-ID <d2h3slFjevmU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <70a04d91-cc40-406d-8610-9c730a895e8d@googlegroups.com> <d2gd68Fdt1eU1@mid.individual.net> <2ecd90e4-4635-4b94-a4b3-5a2254d167e6@googlegroups.com> <d2glu7Fg0rqU1@mid.individual.net> <12cb27de-eed7-4c0a-93fb-0f6d856af9dc@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


On 6/08/2015 9:06 PM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> On Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 11:58:50 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 6/08/2015 4:58 PM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ ON THE
>>> ECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, A. Einstein, 1905: "From this
>>> there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points
>>> A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the
>>> stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is
>>> moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its
>>> arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock
>>> moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B
>>> by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t
>>> being the time occupied in the journey from A to B."
>>>
>>> The valid conclusions are:
>>>
>>> (A) The clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has
>>> remained at B, as judged from the stationary system.
>>>
>>> (B) The clock which has remained at B lags behind the one moved
>>> from A to B, as judged from the moving system.
>>
>> These are not valid conclusions. The word "lags" relates to
>> positions, whereas the original propositions related to rates. Did
>> you think no one would notice?
>
> You mean Einstein's "the clock moved from A to B lags behind the
> other" relates to positions, not rates, of the clocks? How dishonest
> or silly can you be, Sylvia?

Well, if your intent was that "lag" was a reference to rates, then your 
"conclusions" are just redundant restatements, and are not in any way 
contradictory.

Sylvia.

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


Thread

LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-05 23:23 -0700
  Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-08-06 16:29 +1000
    Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-05 23:58 -0700
      Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-08-06 18:58 +1000
        Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-06 04:06 -0700
          Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-08-06 22:56 +1000
            Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-06 06:28 -0700
              Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-08-06 23:42 +1000
              Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 07:55 -0700
                Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-06 08:37 -0700
                Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 12:34 -0700
            Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-06 08:30 -0700
  Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 03:43 -0700
    Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-06 08:43 -0700
      Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 14:21 -0700
  Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-08-06 08:55 -0500
    Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato <rvalls162@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 12:05 -0700
  Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-08-06 21:47 +0200
    Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-08-06 21:50 +0200
      Re: LOGICAL REFUTATION OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-06 13:41 -0700

csiph-web