TonyYuan2020 2 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 (edited) The fifth scene: 2020.3.9 Given "u" the velocity of A relative to the earth, "w" the velocity of spaceship B relative to A, you should find "v" the velocity of B relative to the earth. ------->velocity positive directionEarth ……………………………….A…………………………………….B……………………………………....u...…………………........…......…..vu is the velocity of A relative to the Earthv is the velocity of B relative to the Earthx is the velocity of Earth relative to Bw is the velocity of B relative to the A Presume: u=0.2C, w=0.8Cw = (u-v)/(1-uv/c^2) = (0.2C - v)/(1-0.2C*v/C^2) = 0.8C0.2-v=(1-0.2v)*0.80.84v = -0.6v = -0.714C, the velocity v of B relative to the earth is -0.714C, velocity direction is opposite to A. you can seee that v and u are in the different direction.But A sees B moving away at 0.8C, what happened? Presume: u=0.2C, w=0.1Cw = (u-v)/(1-uv/c^2) = (0.2C - v)/(1-0.2C*v/C^2) = 0.1C0.2-v=(1-0.2v)*0.10.98v = 0.1v = 0.102C, v and u are in the same direction. You can see different u and different w, the direction of v is different, which is very interesting.Deduction:w = (u+x)/(1+u*x/C^2)if u = 0.2C, put it into the formula. w = (0.2+x)/(1+0.2x) ==> w = (1+5x)/(5+x) ==> x=(5w-1)/(5-w),so if x>0, then (5w-1>0 and 5-w>0) or (5w-1<0 and 5-w<0), simplify this inequality (w>0.2 and w<5) or (w<0.2 and w>5, it is not correct). So we get:....if 0.2<w<1, then x>0.....if w<0.2 or w>1(it is not correct), then x<0.Finally, we can get:....if 0.2C<w<1C, then x>0, v<0; this mean u and v have the contrary velocity direction.....if -1C<w<0.2C, then x<0, v>0; this mean u and v have the same velocity direction.....if w=0.2C, then x=0, v=0; It is so interesting, the value of w will determine the direction of v. ？？？We need to think: is this a Digital Game? Edited March 19, 2020 by TonyYuan2020 Quote Link to post Share on other sites

ralfcis 43 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 What are you talking about? What game are you playing over and over opening multiple threads on the same subject. Someone gave you a formula and it's like you discovered that if you put different values into it you get different answers. Are you then concluding relativity does not consistently produce the same answer every time? Quote Link to post Share on other sites

TonyYuan2020 2 Posted March 19, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 What are you talking about? What game are you playing over and over opening multiple threads on the same subject. Someone gave you a formula and it's like you discovered that if you put different values into it you get different answers. Are you then concluding relativity does not consistently produce the same answer every time? Recognize it, learn from it, find out its problems, and use it to demonstrate it. This is a summary topic for better discussion.My friend, debate is not an end, it is to find out the truth. Quote Link to post Share on other sites

ralfcis 43 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 No idea what you're saying so how is a debate possible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites

ralfcis 43 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 You seem to be perplexed by how a minus sign is related to direction and how it can give such a different final value than a plus sign for the same velocity. When you get into the Doppler Shift Ratio, you'll see a minus sign acts like a division sign. This craziness doesn't exist in Newtonian physics so you believe relativity has made up crazy math that gives fake values to support its fake theory. Give up Tony. You just don't have the talent for this. No amount of explanation will ever convince you to abandon your ignorant beliefs. Quote Link to post Share on other sites

VictorMedvil 307 Posted March 19, 2020 Report Share Posted March 19, 2020 You seem to be perplexed by how a minus sign is related to direction and how it can give such a different final value than a plus sign for the same velocity. When you get into the Doppler Shift Ratio, you'll see a minus sign acts like a division sign. This craziness doesn't exist in Newtonian physics so you believe relativity has made up crazy math that gives fake values to support its fake theory. Give up Tony. You just don't have the talent for this. No amount of explanation will ever convince you to abandon your ignorant beliefs.I agree with this statement. Quote Link to post Share on other sites

TonyYuan2020 2 Posted March 20, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2020 (edited) x = -vYour scene is: x = (u+w)/(1+uw/c^2) = 0.862c ==> w=(x-u)/(1-ux/c^2)E---------------------->A-------------------->B-------------------->E.........u=0.2C...........................w=0.8C....................x=0.86C;The combination of these three data (0.2, 0.8, 0.86) according to the formula must be right.My scene is :w=(u+x)/(1+ux/c^21)=0.8CB---------------------->E--------------------->A--------------------->B................x=0.714C...................u=0.2C.....................w=0.8CThe combination of these three data (0.714, 0.2, 0.8C according to the formula must be right.That's why we're different: (x-u)/(1-ux/c^2) != (u+x)/(1+ux/c^21).Why does this happen? The reason for this difference is that my scene has changed the position of the earth.Janus's : Earth......A...........Bmine: B..........Earth........ASo we only know the relative velocity between A,B and we don't know the position of the earth, we can't calculate the relative velocity to the earth. Even they're very close. I have replied on the previous thread. Thanks, Janus teach me much. He is a great scholar.I give up looking for breakthroughs in the formula of special relativity. Those are mathematics, there will be no flaws. We focus on the bending of the light. Edited March 20, 2020 by TonyYuan2020 Quote Link to post Share on other sites

TonyYuan2020 2 Posted March 20, 2020 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2020 (edited) I agree with this statement. A race between Newton and Einstein, who will win?https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipPiogT4OFvz8gAvi-LHHCWNFKLEQUk6IGdGcgEw The formula w = (u + x) / (1 + ux / C^2) looks okThe formula t '= t * sqrt (1-v^2 / C^2) looks okBut together, it's wrong. Edited March 20, 2020 by TonyYuan2020 Quote Link to post Share on other sites

## Recommended Posts

## Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.