Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Newton and Galilean Relativity
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <plccfr$25j$1@pcls7.std.com>
References: <574c7dff-167b-48a3-a28f-ef396c6e5a2c@googlegroups.com>  <pl1drq$dba$1@gioia.aioe.org> <066720b3-2d3d-4cbc-9537-189497dc6a2a@googlegroups.com>  <pl1qfr$12d7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <6aba9465-cc11-43e7-9a94-1f6924af9609@googlegroups.com>  <pl23vh$1ic4$1@gioia.aioe.org> <9c14f4d6-f66d-4487-9149-6951fd2aac80@googlegroups.com> <pl2f15$2o1$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ee3cd87b-2821-4b60-a61b-e3f800c35d0b@googlegroups.com>  <pl2oo1$eeq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <655ed31b-b262-4b7f-90dc-c4d2b1c57189@googlegroups.com>  <pl3v94$8h5$1@gioia.aioe.org> <b81bf009-f0d8-4b50-a901-db314dadefc9@googlegroups.com>  <pl4baq$ttp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4d53879e-788f-40c9-b793-1247c95e95fb@googlegroups.com> <pl4o15$1j8s$1@gioia.aioe.org> <8c77a0e4-834f-4326-8401-b094622fe90a@googlegroups.com>  <pl52jf$7j8$1@gioia.aioe.org> <c2131ce0-dd3d-4658-9043-07dea2cd2842@googlegroups.com>  <pl6bql$298$2@gioia.aioe.org> <d0b38cce-f8f5-4201-81b6-25d15d53a03e@googlegroups.com>  <pl9jrl$1310$2@gioia.aioe.org> <3f9187d4-6e64-40aa-845e-ed26a571045f@googlegroups.com> <plb92f$u4h$2@pcls7.std.com> <9a55fef4-8310-4029-b31e-98366d543cf1@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1534702907 2227 192.74.137.71 (19 Aug 2018 18:21:47 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 18:21:47 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: nn/6.6.5
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:468365

Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> writes:

>On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 1:17:21 AM UTC-7, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> writes:

>> >OK, so here is the situation.  We have a car traveling at 60 miles per
>> >hour on a highway.  In the car is a clock that is slower than a clock on
>> >the ground by the side of the highway.

>> And there you go with broken clocks again! The only thing that you can
>> prove by using a broken clock is that the broken clock will produce the
>> wrong answer!

>You cannot prove that the clock is broken by the information I gave.

WTF??? You just said the clock ran slow!

Remember, ideal (non-broken) clocks ALWAYS keep perfect proper time. That
is, any observer riding along with the clock (for example, his wristwatch)
will ALWAYS see it working perfectly.

Your "clock slower than the one by the side of the highway" is your
mysterious Winn transform. You don't (won't) state exactly how it runs
slow, but let's say for example it runs at 99% of the rate of a proper
clock, meaning it will lose 1 minute for every 100 minutes.  If you let
me know what the Winn Transform really is, I will use that instead.

So we have 3 transforms now.

1) Galilean transform from S to S'.

                         t'=t

2) Winn transform from proper time in S' to broken clock n'.

                         n'=0.99*t'

1) Galilean transform from S' to S.

                         n=n'

Combine them all and you just get:

                         n=0.99*t

Which proves...broken clocks are broken. That's it. No proof the Lorentz
transform is wrong, or the Galilean transform is correct (since you also
use the Winn Transform)..