Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #359808
| 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> |
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 | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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