The inertial frame concept in 1905 Relativity
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist", but pseudoscience rules
Next: Physics Turned Upside Down to Keep the Hour Glass of Time Flowing
From: valls on 20 Jul 2010 08:25 On 19 jul, 18:37, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Jul 19, 12:17 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > > On 19 jul, 08:36, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > On Jul 19, 3:35 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > On 16 jul, 16:39, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 16, 11:31 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brache already did that hundreds of years ago. > > > > > > > > > The ECI is a centre of mass inertial frame, in both the Newtonian view > > > > > > > > and the 1905 Relativity one, in both holding good the Newtonian > > > > > > > > mechanical laws. And you must know that it is absolutely impossible to > > > > > > > > describe a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest following > > > > > > > > Newtons laws (Tycho Brahes work precedes Newtons one). > > > > > > > > You are an imbecile, old fart. > > > > > > > > > To describe > > > > > > > > the Suns trajectory you need to consider the Galaxy centre of mass > > > > > > > > inertial frame (or maybe a greater one), > > > > > > > > No, old fart. You can use ANY frame. This is the whole point of > > > > > > > relativity. > > > > > > > If you insist, describe then the Sun's trajectory in the ECI. > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brahe already did this almost 600 years ago. How dense > > > > > are you? > > > > > We are talking here about inertial frames, the ones denoted by 1905 > > > > Einstein stationary systems, in which the equations of Newtonian > > > > mechanics hold good. I insist, describe the Sun's trajectory in the > > > > ECI using Newton's laws. > > > > Imbecile, Tycho Brahe already showed how this can be done 600 years > > > ago. See here :http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s8-01/8-01.htm > > > Incredible! Tycho Brahe using Newton's laws. Surely he made a time > > travel. > > > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) > > He didn't need to, his calculations were good enough. Why don't you > read the reference I sent you, old fart?- Ocultar texto de la cita - > > - Mostrar texto de la cita - Any description of a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest is a clear violation of Newton's laws. We are considering here only inertial frames (stationary systems in 1905 Einstein denotation) in which Newtonian equations hold good. Then, no sense at all to refer Tycho Brahe's work. RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
From: artful on 20 Jul 2010 08:29 On Jul 20, 10:25 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > On 19 jul, 18:37, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 19, 12:17 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > On 19 jul, 08:36, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 19, 3:35 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > On 16 jul, 16:39, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 16, 11:31 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brache already did that hundreds of years ago. > > > > > > > > > > The ECI is a centre of mass inertial frame, in both the Newtonian view > > > > > > > > > and the 1905 Relativity one, in both holding good the Newtonian > > > > > > > > > mechanical laws. And you must know that it is absolutely impossible to > > > > > > > > > describe a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest following > > > > > > > > > Newtons laws (Tycho Brahes work precedes Newtons one). > > > > > > > > > You are an imbecile, old fart. > > > > > > > > > > To describe > > > > > > > > > the Suns trajectory you need to consider the Galaxy centre of mass > > > > > > > > > inertial frame (or maybe a greater one), > > > > > > > > > No, old fart. You can use ANY frame. This is the whole point of > > > > > > > > relativity. > > > > > > > > If you insist, describe then the Sun's trajectory in the ECI. > > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brahe already did this almost 600 years ago. How dense > > > > > > are you? > > > > > > We are talking here about inertial frames, the ones denoted by 1905 > > > > > Einstein stationary systems, in which the equations of Newtonian > > > > > mechanics hold good. I insist, describe the Sun's trajectory in the > > > > > ECI using Newton's laws. > > > > > Imbecile, Tycho Brahe already showed how this can be done 600 years > > > > ago. See here :http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s8-01/8-01.htm > > > > Incredible! Tycho Brahe using Newton's laws. Surely he made a time > > > travel. > > > > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) > > > He didn't need to, his calculations were good enough. Why don't you > > read the reference I sent you, old fart?- Ocultar texto de la cita - > > > - Mostrar texto de la cita - > > Any description of a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest is a > clear violation of Newton's laws. We are considering here only > inertial frames (stationary systems in 1905 Einstein denotation) in > which Newtonian equations hold good. Then, no sense at all to refer > Tycho Brahe's work. But you said the ECI frame is an inertial frame. And in that frame, the sun moves around the earth. Gees .. try to at least be consistent in your idiocy.
From: valls on 20 Jul 2010 08:32 On 20 jul, 05:44, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 20, 8:19 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > On 19 jul, 18:13, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:> On Jul 20, 4:53 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > Read by yourself the 1905 text > > > > I have. You clearly misinterpret it and read into it things that are > > > not there. > > > Be explicit. > > No thanks .. there might be children watching > > > Refer the text you say I misinterpret. > > The 1905 paper .. pretty much all of it that you quote to support your > nonsense. I am open to continue our dialogue after you make the adequate references to the 1905 text. RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)
From: artful on 20 Jul 2010 08:36 On Jul 20, 10:32 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > On 20 jul, 05:44, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 8:19 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > On 19 jul, 18:13, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:> On Jul 20, 4:53 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > Read by yourself the 1905 text > > > > > I have. You clearly misinterpret it and read into it things that are > > > > not there. > > > > Be explicit. > > > No thanks .. there might be children watching > > > > Refer the text you say I misinterpret. > > > The 1905 paper .. pretty much all of it that you quote to support your > > nonsense. > > I am open to continue our dialogue after you make the adequate > references to the 1905 text. I've already dealt with one quote from the (translated) paper that you misinterpret and claim supports your view. So far 100% of what you've quoted to me as supporting your view has been misinterpreted by you. Do you have any more that you want to put forward as supporting your view?
From: Dono. on 20 Jul 2010 09:40
On Jul 20, 5:25 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > On 19 jul, 18:37, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 19, 12:17 pm, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > On 19 jul, 08:36, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 19, 3:35 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > On 16 jul, 16:39, "Dono." <sa...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 16, 11:31 am, va...(a)icmf.inf.cu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brache already did that hundreds of years ago. > > > > > > > > > > The ECI is a centre of mass inertial frame, in both the Newtonian view > > > > > > > > > and the 1905 Relativity one, in both holding good the Newtonian > > > > > > > > > mechanical laws. And you must know that it is absolutely impossible to > > > > > > > > > describe a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest following > > > > > > > > > Newtons laws (Tycho Brahes work precedes Newtons one). > > > > > > > > > You are an imbecile, old fart. > > > > > > > > > > To describe > > > > > > > > > the Suns trajectory you need to consider the Galaxy centre of mass > > > > > > > > > inertial frame (or maybe a greater one), > > > > > > > > > No, old fart. You can use ANY frame. This is the whole point of > > > > > > > > relativity. > > > > > > > > If you insist, describe then the Sun's trajectory in the ECI. > > > > > > > Old fart, Tycho Brahe already did this almost 600 years ago. How dense > > > > > > are you? > > > > > > We are talking here about inertial frames, the ones denoted by 1905 > > > > > Einstein stationary systems, in which the equations of Newtonian > > > > > mechanics hold good. I insist, describe the Sun's trajectory in the > > > > > ECI using Newton's laws. > > > > > Imbecile, Tycho Brahe already showed how this can be done 600 years > > > > ago. See here :http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s8-01/8-01.htm > > > > Incredible! Tycho Brahe using Newton's laws. Surely he made a time > > > travel. > > > > RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato) > > > He didn't need to, his calculations were good enough. Why don't you > > read the reference I sent you, old fart?- Ocultar texto de la cita - > > > - Mostrar texto de la cita - > > Any description of a Sun moving with respect to an Earth at rest is a > clear violation of Newton's laws.[/quote] No, imbecile, celestial bodies gravitate around EACH OTHER. This falss straight out of the equations of motion. > Then, no sense at all to refer Tycho Brahe's work. > Why don't you read the reference I sent you? It is from an excellent book on relativity. The book is free, it is time you started learning relativity. I understand that in Cuba you have no such things, this is why you keep thumbing your copy of the 1905 paper but in the rest of the world we have a lot of books. Start reading here, maybe there is hope that you can learn some relativity: http://www.mathpages.com/rr/rrtoc.htm It is avery good book, maybe it will dispell some of your idiocy. |