Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #617054

Re: There is no material length contraction

From	whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: There is no material length contraction
Date	2023-08-07 18:01 -0500
Message-ID	<kjdbesF9paiU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	(14 earlier) <uam587$1r57q$2@dont-email.me> <d8fd1c53-df70-4788-98df-47acd8b46a01n@googlegroups.com> <uar381$2tjho$3@dont-email.me> <de08a33b-9800-4812-b3d5-e80a3eec7bb0n@googlegroups.com> <uarlbm$30nt7$2@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 8/7/2023 3:48 PM, Volney wrote:
> On 8/7/2023 2:01 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>> On Monday, August 7, 2023 at 11:39:49 AM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>> On 8/6/2023 5:22 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>>> On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 2:43:23 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>>>> On 8/4/2023 3:58 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 1:34:18 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/4/2023 7:11 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 10:37:29 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/3/2023 3:42 PM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 2:01:07 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/3/2023 10:01 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 1:52:55 AM UTC-4, Sylvia Else 
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If observer A measures observer B's velocity relative to A 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> magnitude |v|, then observer B measures observer A's 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> velocity relative
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to B also to have magnitude |v|.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No, That's a wrong assumption.
>>>>>>>>>>> It is not an assumption, Stupid Ken. It is what SR derives 
>>>>>>>>>>> from its two
>>>>>>>>>>> postulates.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Stupid Mike, it is a wrong assumption because the SR postulate 
>>>>>>>>>> (P2) is wrong.
>>>>>>>>> A postulate cannot be wrong. A postulate is a postulate.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> A and B each measures a different [V[
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> A and B measure the same v but in opposite directions. They 
>>>>>>>>>>> have the
>>>>>>>>>>> same magnitude |v|.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No they don't get the same result because three clock seconds 
>>>>>>>>>> have different value of time.
>>>>>>>>> They have the same value of time because the second has an exact
>>>>>>>>> definition, Stupid Ken. In addition to symmetry arguments for the
>>>>>>>>> velocity having the same magnitude.
>>>>>>>>>>>> cbecause their clock seconds have a different TIME content.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You assumed wrongly that a clock second is an absolute unit of 
>>>>>>>>>> time......it is not.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No, Stupid Ken, time is measured in seconds which is defined 
>>>>>>>>>>> as the time
>>>>>>>>>>> of 9192631770 Cs transition cycles.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No stupid Mike, you assumed wrongly that each cycle of Cs have 
>>>>>>>>>> the same interval of TIME.....they do not
>>>>>>>>> Stupid Ken, your assertions are not valid arguments. The second is
>>>>>>>>> DEFINED as that many Cs transition cycles. A definition cannot 
>>>>>>>>> be wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> stupid Mike, what does the following equation mean to you?
>>>>>>>> 1 second in frame A= 1/gamma second in frame B
>>>>>
>>>>>>> It means Ken Seto doesn't understand relativity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No it means that you don't know what mutual time dilation mean.
>>>>> I know what mutual time dilation is, Stupid Ken. You don't. For one
>>>>> thing, mutual time dilation is mutual. That's why A will see B's clock
>>>>> as running slow while B will see A's clock as running slow.
>>>>
>>>> No stupid Mike .....Einstein didn't know which clock is accumulating 
>>>> clock seconds
>>>> at a slower rate, so he just say that each observer sees the other 
>>>> clock running at a slower rate.
>>> No, Stupid Ken, he proved mutual time dilation mathematically. But since
>>> you cannot handle math beyond the third grade level, it will be forever
>>> a mystery to you, and you'll continue to makeaims about
>>> relativity and Einstein.
>>
>> Stupid Mike, You cannot predict mutual time dilation.
> 
> Yet Einstein did. If you say something can't be done yet it was already 
> done, it can only mean that you're delusional.
> 
>> because there is no such thing. Clock in relative motion accumulate 
>> clock seconds at different rates.
> 
> And again you show that you don't understand mutual time dilation.

The shortest possible list would be of the things he does understand.

Thread

There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 16:42 -0700
  Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-01 10:41 +1000
    Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-07-31 18:15 -0700
    Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 18:38 -0700
      Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-01 12:10 +1000
        Re: There is no material length contraction Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 21:47 -0700
          Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-07-31 22:04 -0700
            Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-03 15:52 +1000
              Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-03 09:50 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 02:55 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-03 09:57 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 03:09 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 07:01 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:30 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 14:01 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 12:42 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Rob Bibler <rreb@bieillii.ir> - 2023-08-03 20:02 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 14:29 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 22:37 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:28 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 04:11 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 13:34 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 10:41 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 23:31 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 21:21 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 00:50 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 10:57 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 14:38 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 10:11 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-06 21:00 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 11:34 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Rondell Verre <eror@vedllele.ee> - 2023-08-05 20:10 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 10:52 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 12:58 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 14:43 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 21:36 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 14:22 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 15:00 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 17:53 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 11:39 -0400
                Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-07 15:53 +0000
                Re: Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 19:24 +0200
                Re: Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-07 18:32 +0000
                Re: Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 22:43 +0200
                Re: Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 12:29 -0500
                Re: Reciprocal dilation of internal chronotropies (SR) Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 16:45 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 11:01 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 16:48 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Nat Vaikule <nukv@vektnaaa.nv> - 2023-08-07 21:25 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 15:34 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Jarrell Martirosov <ajrr@riilromm.aa> - 2023-08-08 10:03 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-07 18:01 -0500
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-10 18:53 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 19:07 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 13:20 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-10 18:58 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ronaldo Amerhanov <hera@aeladhrd.ma> - 2023-08-12 20:57 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 06:07 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 09:06 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 16:21 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 09:39 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ozzie Jakushov <ezhu@ijjhhouv.az> - 2023-08-04 21:35 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 15:58 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Beraldo Hapy <lhap@aaloyohe.pl> - 2023-08-05 03:00 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 05:30 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Dalton Dubman <nlat@tualtadd.db> - 2023-08-08 14:02 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-08 10:45 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 06:48 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 06:58 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-09 12:31 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-10 08:38 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-10 11:56 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Kaosayn Shakhbazyan <nazs@aoonaaoo.ah> - 2023-08-10 16:30 +0000
        Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 22:12 -0700
          Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-03 16:04 +1000
            Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 00:19 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-03 19:06 +1000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 02:53 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-04 08:03 +1000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:23 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-04 13:22 +0000
            Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-03 01:21 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-03 19:10 +1000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-03 09:56 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-03 08:57 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-03 16:13 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-03 09:24 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:22 +0200
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-03 17:28 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-03 10:57 -0700
        Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 04:25 -0700
          Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 09:08 -0400
            Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:14 -0700
            Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 07:40 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 10:30 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Shkelqim Jadrennikov <meem@qnoeeooq.ds> - 2023-08-01 20:49 +0000
              Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 22:57 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 06:43 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 14:11 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:38 -0700
            Re: There is no material length contraction Darling Vavravsky <rlrg@kakkdvyv.lv> - 2023-08-01 20:33 +0000
              Re: There is no material length contraction Chaney Charnolusky <ycck@sarhhnkn.ca> - 2023-08-01 20:59 +0000
          Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-02 08:33 +1000
            Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-01 23:09 +0000
              Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-02 09:15 +1000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-02 10:17 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 03:23 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-02 11:47 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 05:12 -0700
            Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 16:40 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 16:51 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2023-08-02 10:57 +1000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 18:26 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 23:04 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 21:58 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 21:59 -0700
              Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 23:00 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:53 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 15:01 -0400
                Re: There is no material length contraction Moody Vallah <mahv@ohoymldo.lv> - 2023-08-03 19:41 +0000
                Re: There is no material length contraction Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:00 -0700
                Re: There is no material length contraction James Dzhunkovsky <uskv@mdjjsnue.ze> - 2023-08-03 19:23 +0000
    Re: There is no material length contraction nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-01 11:07 +0200
  Re: There is no material length contraction JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 17:46 -0700
    Re: There is no material length contraction Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 18:40 -0700
    Re: There is no material length contraction Lamont Bakhmutov <mktk@tomhmtmm.ml> - 2023-08-01 21:10 +0000
      Re: There is no material length contraction Thad Mokrinsky <aonk@yoitaito.rm> - 2023-08-01 21:33 +0000

csiph-web