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


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #400636

Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck

From moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck
Date 2016-12-02 23:51 +0000
Organization The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
Message-ID <o1t1e7$5ie$1@pcls7.std.com> (permalink)
References (21 earlier) <0d5b1d3b-fd83-4d4e-b50f-2927f15dc343@googlegroups.com> <o1q46k$1oro$1@gioia.aioe.org> <57197671-e900-444d-a2cb-c6cf3961f4aa@googlegroups.com> <o1s3n1$f93$2@pcls7.std.com> <2e0b7b44-37b1-44d5-990c-9244162fe08c@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw


kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes:

>On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 10:24:24 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> >> > Delta(t')=gamma*Delta(t)
>> >> >
>> >> > This equation says that the passage of Delta(t') on the primed moving clock
>> >> > is equal to gamma*Delta(t) on the umprimed observer's clock.
>> >> 
>> >> No, that's not what that equation means.
>> 
>> >Idiot, if you have another meaning for this equation let us know ....don't 
>> >just making bogus assertion.  
>> 
>> The proper definition is that an observer will measure a moving clock as
>> ticking at the rate r' = r/gamma. Only a relatively moving observer will
>> measure the clock as running slow in SR.

>There is no such measurement SR predicts using the LT.... you falsely asserted that
>the result of the LT prediction as measurement.

No, Stupid Ken.  I said "observer", not "fortune teller".  The observer observes,
and the actual observing involves measurement.  A fortune teller predicts.  Much
of science is observation, including making measurements. A scientist making
observations trying to understand SR will measure a moving clock in order to
verify that it does run slow as SR states.  As I stated, in SR, only an observer
moving relative to the clock will measure it as ticking slower.

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


Thread

Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 08:33 -0600
  Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-28 07:44 -0800
    Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-28 09:56 -0600
      Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-29 05:19 -0800
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-11-29 14:50 +0000
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:37 -0800
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 09:59 -0600
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 08:57 -0600
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:45 -0800
        Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-29 09:00 -0600
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-11-30 06:53 -0800
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-11-30 10:21 -0600
              Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 05:45 -0800
          Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-11-30 19:56 -0600
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-01 08:05 -0800
              Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 11:00 -0600
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-01 12:00 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-01 15:20 -0600
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-02 04:37 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-02 15:24 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-02 14:38 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-02 14:45 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-02 23:51 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-03 04:49 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-04 06:01 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-04 05:53 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-12-04 16:45 +0000
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-12-04 10:52 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 06:27 -0800
                Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-12-02 09:38 -0600
            Re: Kepler, Bullialdus, Newton, Einstein and Planck mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-03 05:41 -0800

csiph-web