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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #617652 > unrolled thread

Rotated relativistic disk

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 11:32 +0000
    Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 11:29 -0700
      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 18:41 +0000
        Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 11:50 -0700
          Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 20:35 +0000
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 14:11 -0700
              Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 22:06 +0000
          Re: Rotated relativistic disk Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 13:47 -0700
      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-15 13:37 -0500
        Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 11:59 -0700
          Re: Rotated relativistic disk "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 12:42 -0700
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 13:08 -0700
        Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-15 21:49 +0000
          Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 15:39 -0700
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-15 22:49 +0000
              Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 16:16 -0700
                Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 16:20 -0700
                Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 11:39 +0000
                  Re: Rotated relativistic disk Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-16 16:36 +0200
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-15 22:55 +0000
              Re: Rotated relativistic disk Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-16 01:15 +0200
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-15 22:58 +0000
            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-15 23:13 +0000
              Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 16:19 -0700
                Re: Rotated relativistic disk Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-15 23:40 -0500
                  Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 12:27 +0000
                  Re: Rotated relativistic disk larry harson <larryharson66@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 16:00 -0700
                    Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 14:44 -0700
                    Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-17 22:27 +0000
                      Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 16:08 -0700
                        Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-17 23:33 +0000
                          Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 21:00 -0700
                    Re: Rotated relativistic disk Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-19 22:17 -0500
                      Re: Rotated relativistic disk "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-20 19:15 -0700
                      Re: Rotated relativistic disk larry harson <larryharson66@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 15:15 -0700
                        Re: Rotated relativistic disk "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 19:38 -0700
                          Re: Rotated relativistic disk JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 16:28 -0700
                            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 22:25 -0700
                Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 11:50 +0000
                  Re: Rotated relativistic disk Faunce Belman <faae@bncnmlef.ee> - 2023-08-16 12:17 +0000
                    Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 12:20 +0000
                      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Brain Baburin <bbbu@rbbabuar.ai> - 2023-08-16 12:36 +0000
                        Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 12:50 +0000
                          Re: Rotated relativistic disk Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-16 16:47 +0200
                            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 15:00 +0000
                            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 17:06 +0200
                              Re: Rotated relativistic disk Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-16 19:24 +0200
                          Re: Rotated relativistic disk Titus Vikulov <uvuv@vkuiklvi.ot> - 2023-08-16 20:06 +0000
                            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 20:25 +0000
                            Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-16 20:35 +0000
                              Re: Rotated relativistic disk Stephan Lerner <ehre@renerrrp.ne> - 2023-08-16 21:45 +0000
                                Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-17 10:51 +0000
    Re: Rotated relativistic disk "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 13:01 -0700
      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Markeen Grohar <mgrr@oehgkark.ag> - 2023-08-14 20:26 +0000
        Re: Rotated relativistic disk "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 13:45 -0700
      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 20:40 +0000
    Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 20:44 +0000
      Re: Rotated relativistic disk Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-08-14 22:40 +0000

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#617904

Le 16/08/2023 à 14:17, Faunce Belman a écrit :

>  The max speed of any point of the disk cannot exceed c. 

 Vous avez découvert ça tout seul?

 R.H. 

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617907

Richard Hachel wrote:

> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:17, Faunce Belman a écrit : 
>>  The max speed of any point of the disk cannot exceed c.
> 
>  Vous avez découvert ça tout seul?

this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max speed 
at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being destroyed?? Or, 
are you letting it go spiralling??

'𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 
𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/

the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me the 
fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting to death 
for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲?? How stupid can you be?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617908

Le 16/08/2023 à 14:36, Brain Baburin a écrit :
> 
> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max speed 
> at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 
> being destroyed? ?  Or, 
> are you letting it go spiralling? ? 
> 
> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 
> 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 
> 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 
> 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 
> 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
> 
> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me the 
> fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 
> 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting to death 
> for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ?  How 
> stupid can you be?

Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".

Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to avoid 
major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk
at rest a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, when 
the periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the external 
part of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already long been 
much greater than the contraction of the inner part of the disc (medullary 
part).

I beg you to set R'=R.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²), and you will see that the outer 
half-ray contracts more than the outer half-ray.

This is logical because Vo=V(tang) and V(tang) itself depends on the 
radius.

You understand?

R.H.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617912

Le 16/08/2023 à 14:50, Richard Hachel a écrit :
> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:36, Brain Baburin a écrit :
>>
>> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max 
>> speed at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being 
>> destroyed? ?  Or, are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 
>> 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
>> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>>
>> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me 
>> the fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting 
>> to death for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ?  How stupid can you 
>> be?
> 
> Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".
> 
> Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to 
> avoid major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk
> at rest a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, 
> when the periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the 
> external part of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already 
> long been much greater than the contraction of the inner part of the 
> disc (medullary part).
> 
> I beg you to set R'=R.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²), and you will see that the outer 
> half-ray contracts more than the outer half-ray.
> 
> This is logical because Vo=V(tang) and V(tang) itself depends on the 
> radius.
> 
> You understand?
> 
> R.H.

M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand seriously talking with the nym-shifting
troll...

L'arbre de la vie est toujours vert.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617914

Le 16/08/2023 à 16:47, Python a écrit :

> L'arbre de la vie est toujours vert.

 J'ai pas trouvé la contrepèterie.

 R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617915

On 2023-08-16 14:47:47 +0000, Python said:

> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:50, Richard Hachel a écrit :
>> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:36, Brain Baburin a écrit :
>>> 
>>> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max 
>>> speed at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 
>>> being destroyed? ?  Or, are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>>> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 
>>> 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 
>>> 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
>>> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>>> 
>>> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me 
>>> the fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will 
>>> go fighting to death for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? 
>>> ?  How stupid can you be?
>> 
>> Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".
>> 
>> Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to 
>> avoid major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk
>> at rest a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, 
>> when the periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the 
>> external part of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already 
>> long been much greater than the contraction of the inner part of the 
>> disc (medullary part).
>> 
>> I beg you to set R'=R.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²), and you will see that the outer 
>> half-ray contracts more than the outer half-ray.
>> 
>> This is logical because Vo=V(tang) and V(tang) itself depends on the radius.
>> 
>> You understand?
>> 
>> R.H.
> 
> M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand seriously talking with the nym-shifting
> troll...

You forgot the "Dr."
> 
> L'arbre de la vie est toujours vert.


-- 
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 36 years; mainly 
in England until 1987.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617920

Le 16/08/2023 à 17:06, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
> On 2023-08-16 14:47:47 +0000, Python said:
> 
>> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:50, Richard Hachel a écrit :
>>> Le 16/08/2023 à 14:36, Brain Baburin a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max 
>>>> speed at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being 
>>>> destroyed? ?  Or, are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>>>> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 
>>>> 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
>>>> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>>>>
>>>> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell 
>>>> me the fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go 
>>>> fighting to death for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ?  How 
>>>> stupid can you be?
>>>
>>> Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".
>>>
>>> Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to 
>>> avoid major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk
>>> at rest a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, 
>>> when the periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the 
>>> external part of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has 
>>> already long been much greater than the contraction of the inner part 
>>> of the disc (medullary part).
>>>
>>> I beg you to set R'=R.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²), and you will see that the outer 
>>> half-ray contracts more than the outer half-ray.
>>>
>>> This is logical because Vo=V(tang) and V(tang) itself depends on the 
>>> radius.
>>>
>>> You understand?
>>>
>>> R.H.
>>
>> M.D. Richard "Hachel" Lengrand seriously talking with the nym-shifting
>> troll...
> 
> You forgot the "Dr."

My bad. Sorry.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617930

Richard Hachel wrote:

>> this man is an idiot. If the circumference goes at c, what's the max
>> speed at the middle of the radius, without your 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗶𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗸 being
>> destroyed? ?  Or, are you letting it go spiralling? ?
>> '𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗻𝗲𝘂𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻'𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺
>> 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀' - 𝗝𝗮𝗻𝘂𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗸𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻
>> https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IjerwwrBw4Me/
>> 
>> the fucking nazi nato admits they lost the war, all wars. You tell me
>> the fucking Sweden, Norway and Finland, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲, will go fighting
>> to death for Bulgaria and Romania, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲? ?  How stupid can you
>> be?
> 
> Nobody talks about spinning the disc in a "spiral".
> 
> Note that (I beg you to read very carefully what I write in order to
> avoid major errors of misunderstanding) if we trace, on the disk at rest
> a circumference at mid-radius, then that the disk is rotated, when the
> periphery of the disk approaches c, the contraction of the external part
> of the disk (cortical part in medical terms) has already long been much
> greater than the contraction of the inner part of the disc (medullary
> part).

it doesn't matter the contraction. The disk will go spiralling. You guys 
are idiots. Is it a rigid disk or not. This evil men don't undrestand 
physics, domains and subdomains. That "Python" is a fool.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617932

Le 16/08/2023 à 22:06, Titus Vikulov a écrit :

> "Python" is a fool.

 Yes.

 R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617934

Le 16/08/2023 à 22:06, Titus Vikulov a écrit :

> Is it a rigid disk or not.

It's not a question of rigidity or not.
Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so 
rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk with 
a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters, if it 
is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.
What you have to understand (PLEASE understand) is that it's not really 
the disc that is deforming, but the spatial metric.
A bit like the vagon which measures twelve meters, only measures 7.2 in 
the Galilean reference frames at this speed.
It's not that the car is shrinking, but space itself is contracting.
There, it's the same, but in rotating circles, the effect becomes 
absolute.
The rotating disk space actually contracts, and the non-rotating disk sees 
it contracted, and the contracted disk sees the disk at rest expanded 
relative to it. The effect here is absolute.

R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617938

Richard Hachel wrote:

>> Is it a rigid disk or not.
> 
> It's not a question of rigidity or not.
> Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
> It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so
> rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
> And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk
> with a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters,
> if it is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.

hi my friend, nice to meet you. So the middle will go at 0.4c, which will
contract too. No spiralling, unless you think it exceeds. You are so cool. 
I love you so much.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617995

Le 16/08/2023 à 23:45, Stephan Lerner a écrit :
> Richard Hachel wrote:
> 
>>> Is it a rigid disk or not.
>> 
>> It's not a question of rigidity or not.
>> Ideally, an absolutely non-deformable disk is taken.
>> It is admitted that it is made of such a material, so indeformable, so
>> rigid, that it will not deform by one millimeter.
>> And yet Dr. Hachel asserts that the disk will deform, and that a disk
>> with a radius of 5 meters will become a disk with a radius of 3 meters,
>> if it is rotated until a tangential speed of Vo=0.8c is obtained.
> 
> hi my friend, nice to meet you. So the middle will go at 0.4c, which will
> contract too. No spiralling, unless you think it exceeds. You are so cool. 
> I love you so much.

Hi my friend.

It is important to clarify something.

We assume that the disk at rest has 5 meters of radius, and,
if you ask a competent relativist physicist (there must be some), he will 
answer that if you spin the disk at Vo=0.8c of tangential speed, the 
circumference of the disk will become 3 meters.

This is what excellent posters like Sylvia Else, Paul B.Andersen, Julien 
Arlandis will say.

You are going to add, as you have just done here, that, if we take a 
circumference at mid-radius of the revolving disc, the tangential speed 
will be two times less. Let Vo=0.4c.

It's just as fair.

But we must add this: this contraction is not homogeneous, and the 
external part of the disc (cortical part) contracts much more than the 
medullary part (medullary part).

It's so logical that I wonder why I have to explain it.

Thus, if we draw a circumference at mid-radius on the disc at rest,
this circumference will no longer be at mid-radius, but no longer "inside" 
when the disk turns.

The calculations are very simple, and anyone can do them.

R.H.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617702

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 4:32:53 AM UTC-7, Richard Hachel wrote:
> It's been centuries since we talked about it here. 
> 
> It's time for some baby steps, guys. 
> 
> Baby steps! 
> 
> We set x,y,z,To. 
> 
> These are the coordinates of a point on the disk at rest. 
> 
> Another disk, perfectly similar at rest, rotates opposite it with a 
> relativistic Omega angular velocity. 
> 
> The two central points O and O' are face to face, but so close that one 
> imagines that they are conjoined. 
> 
> What happens to the new coordinates (x',y',z',To')? 
> 
> The question is dramatically simple. 
> 
> Terrified, the speakers of this forum will begin to insult, criticize, 
> sulk. 
> 
> The goal is simple: to hide his lack of culture and the fact that we don't 
> know how to answer. 
> 
> Is it true or is it not true? 
> 
> Who can answer? 
> 
> R.H.

Where does rotation get  above a practical Gamma math low speed?
Where is your fastest rotation manifesting in the universe?
Rotation is a motion only manifesting at low speed.
It remains that way in the Unified Field.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617704

mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

> Where does rotation get  above a practical Gamma math low speed?
> Where is your fastest rotation manifesting in the universe? Rotation is
> a motion only manifesting at low speed. It remains that way in the
> Unified Field.

so true indeed. I think I solved the unknowns in my 𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀_𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹. And have to solve it without the assumption of a curved spacetime and gravity tensors.

𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮_𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗸𝗲𝘀_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗗𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲_𝗕𝗼𝗮𝘁_𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻_𝗙𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀
https://sputnikglobe.com/20230814/russia-targets-ukrainian-naval-drone-facilities-1112585531.html

The Russian Armed Forces carried out a missile strike against Ukrainian maritime drone manufacturing facilities and storage areas last night.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618043

On Monday, August 14, 2023 at 1:26:34 PM UTC-7, Markeen Grohar wrote:
> mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: 
> 
> > Where does rotation get above a practical Gamma math low speed? 
> > Where is your fastest rotation manifesting in the universe? Rotation is 
> > a motion only manifesting at low speed. It remains that way in the 
> > Unified Field.
> so true indeed. I think I solved the unknowns in my 𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁_𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀_𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹. And have to solve it without the assumption of a curved spacetime and gravity tensors. 
> 
> 𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮_𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗸𝗲𝘀_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗮𝗻_𝗗𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗲_𝗕𝗼𝗮𝘁_𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻_𝗙𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 
> https://sputnikglobe.com/20230814/russia-targets-ukrainian-naval-drone-facilities-1112585531.html 
> 
> The Russian Armed Forces carried out a missile strike against Ukrainian maritime drone manufacturing facilities and storage areas last night.

What about motion can change the universe's dimensions or distort an atomic frame?
How can the universe flatten from three to two dimensions?
Atom's would flatten falling through an event horizon.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617706

Le 14/08/2023 à 22:01, "mitchr...@gmail.com" a écrit :
> 
> Where does rotation get  above a practical Gamma math low speed?
> Where is your fastest rotation manifesting in the universe?
> Rotation is a motion only manifesting at low speed.
> It remains that way in the Unified Field.

Not only at very high speeds, but at the speeds of revolution of the 
planets, like Mercury, the relativistic effects of special relativity can 
be measured.
I'm absolutely certain that if you take my equations, and apply them in 
advance of the perihelion of mercury, just that, you're going to find that 
it's a very simple special relativity effect.

R.H. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617708

Le 14/08/2023 à 13:32, Richard Hachel a écrit :
> It's been centuries since we talked about it here.
>  
> It's time for some baby steps, guys.
>  
> Baby steps!
>  
> We set x,y,z,To.
>  
> These are the coordinates of a point on the disk at rest.
>  
> Another disk, perfectly similar at rest, rotates opposite it with a relativistic 
> Omega angular velocity.
>  
> The two central points O and O' are face to face, but so close that one imagines 
> that they are conjoined.
>  
> What happens to the new coordinates (x',y',z',To')?
>  
> The question is dramatically simple.
>  
> Terrified, the speakers of this forum will begin to insult, criticize, sulk.
>  
> The goal is simple: to hide his lack of culture and the fact that we don't know 
> how to answer.
>  
> Is it true or is it not true?
>  
> Who can answer?
>  
> R.H.

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?qnk4CUhwwuVoNzAa7_vbwNJMgJA@jntp/Data.Media:1>

R.H.
<http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=qnk4CUhwwuVoNzAa7_vbwNJMgJA@jntp> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#617719

Le 14/08/2023 à 22:44, Richard Hachel a écrit :
> Le 14/08/2023 à 13:32, Richard Hachel a écrit :
>> It's been centuries since we talked about it here.
>>  
>> It's time for some baby steps, guys.
>>  
>> Baby steps!
>>  
>> We set x,y,z,To.
>>  
>> These are the coordinates of a point on the disk at rest.
>>  
>> Another disk, perfectly similar at rest, rotates opposite it with a relativistic 
>> Omega angular velocity.
>>  
>> The two central points O and O' are face to face, but so close that one imagines 
>> that they are conjoined.
>>  
>> What happens to the new coordinates (x',y',z',To')?
>>  
>> The question is dramatically simple.
>>  
>> Terrified, the speakers of this forum will begin to insult, criticize, sulk.
>>  
>> The goal is simple: to hide his lack of culture and the fact that we don't know 
>> how to answer.
>>  
>> Is it true or is it not true?
>>  
>> Who can answer?
>>  
>> R.H.
> 
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?qnk4CUhwwuVoNzAa7_vbwNJMgJA@jntp/Data.Media:1>
> 
> R.H.
> <http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=qnk4CUhwwuVoNzAa7_vbwNJMgJA@jntp> 

Je vois que malheureusement, les participants ne suivent pas (j'admets que 
beaucoup n'ont pas les capacités intellectuelles de suivre, mais bon, je 
ne m'explique pas ce manque d'effort). 

Je vais donner les transformations circulaires correctes, attention ça va 
encore décoiffer, et plusieurs vont se mettre à hurler, tant pis...

Ce qu'il faut bien comprendre, dans cette histoire de disque relativiste 
tournant, c'est que O et O' restent toujours conjoints dans le temps. Leur 
position ne varie pas. Nous ne sommes plus dans le cas d'un référentiel 
galiléen où O' se déplaçait sur l'axe des x, en perpétuel changement 
positionnel par rapport à O'.

Ceci admit (je suis sidéré de la difficulté avec laquelle je suis 
contrait d'enseigner et les petits pas que je dois faire, c'est 
surréaliste) on va allez plus loin. O et O' restent dans le même 
référentiel qui est celui du laboratoire.

Ils sont même interchangeables.

Respirez, soufflez. 

Je répète : O et O' sont interchangeables. Que le disque tourne ou pas, 
ils resteront toujours dans le même référentiel : celui du labo.

Respirez, soufflez.

Cessez de jouer les jaloux ou les arrogants, votre position absurde me 
fait rire. 

On continue : ce qu'il faut bien comprendre, c'est que si O et O' na 
varient pas, To et To" ne varient pas non plus (pour O et O') puisque 
c'est la même chose.

On va donc avoir, ne riez pas les mais, To'=To.

C'est d'une évidence monstrueuse.

J'espère que tout le monde suit. 

Mais, comme le disent la plupart des intervenants ici, on va avoir une 
contraction de la circonférence du disque. 

Il est évident que sur cette circonférence, que l'on va faire tourner à 
Vo=0.8c de vitesse tangentielle,
par exemple, va devenir, si elle faisait un mètre de circonférence, 
soixante centimètre de circonférence par rapport au disque témoin, qui 
lui, est resté au repos. 

Les effets de l'accélération du disque étant absolus, et le disque se 
déplaçant en x et en y, les transformations vont devenir celles qui se 
trouve dans le petit schéma ci-dessous. 

Nous voilà donc avec les transformations correctes.

Respirez, soufflez...

Ce n'est pas tout.

Il va de soi que tous les points du disque, nouvellement positionnés ont 
une vitesse angulaire.

En fonction de leur vitesse tangentielle, dans le référentiel du labo, 
chaque point aura sa propre notion du temps.

L'équation deviendra pour les temps propres : Tr=To/sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) 

C'est la notion de dilatation classique des temps.

Respirez, soufflez...

S'il y a des choses que vous ne comprenez pas, demandez.

Mieux vaut paraitre con cinq minutes que de le rester toute sa vie.

Et s'il vous plait, quittez cette arrogance qui est la vôtre, et qui est 
parfois très surfaite. 

<http://news2.nemoweb.net/jntp?wr720w8c9wopnb7VXFraF8PIWXU@jntp/Data.Media:1>


R.H. 
<http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=wr720w8c9wopnb7VXFraF8PIWXU@jntp> 

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web