Jump to content
Science Forums

Minkowski SpaceTime diagrams re assigned


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Relativity doesnt have to restate matters that have already been proven like that of nuclear but if you want to use Einstein's e=mc^2 as an example of not knowing about those effects than you're ****in bonkers crazy🤣🤣 Einstein is the worst person you could use as an example of not having his bases in physics covered other than literally only me.

Yes, they would have ruled out any discrepancy that could be caused by any of the effects you mentioned and as a rule of their particular profession WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY prevented those conditions fr arising as a general procedure of experimentation

 

 

 

THE EXPERIMENT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE HYPOTHESIS.

IT IS NOT IN INERTIAL FRAMES AND THEY CHOSE  A "PREFERRED" FRAME.  (in the experiment, the Earth was chosen as a preferred frame, which is a big  no no in einsteins theory)  

According to Einsteins theory, you should be able to  chose the plane going west as the "stationary" frame, and the other planes clock and the Earths master clocks should have been the ones to lose time, BUT THEY DID NOT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

X = ct, this is 100% correct, BUT ONLY FOR LIGHT.  or only when x and ct are both zero. So you cant just plug x = ct into equations replacing x if that x is not referring to light. X distance is

Its a bit hard to get your mind clear of the barrage of pro einstein propaganda, and see the inconsistencies. I suggest you watch the videos made by Yaseen Al Azzam.   Here is the intro.  

Posted Images

20 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Relativity doesnt have to restate matters that have already been proven like that of nuclear but if you want to use Einstein's e=mc^2 as an example of not knowing about those effects than you're ****in bonkers crazy🤣🤣 Einstein is the worst person you could use as an example of not having his bases in physics covered other than literally only me.

Yes, they would have ruled out any discrepancy that could be caused by any of the effects you mentioned and as a rule of their particular profession WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY prevented those conditions fr arising as a general procedure of experimentation

 

 

 

And in the absence of a hypothesis that is rational, containing no contradicting claims, no paradoxes, they should not even have bothered to run an experiment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Clearly in your mind that's only because Einstein was white. When obviously that's not the case. I'm not racist I just call it like it is, especially in 1970s when they did the experiment for a physicist of color to be handed that much money he must have been pretty impressive. It sucks but that's the truth, especially here where standards are obviously higher than anywhere else.

It got nothing to do with Einstein's skin color or mine. ( you seem to think i'm an Indian or something)

No, it's got to do with what some call, the "religion of Scientism", which has a founding dogma that Einstein revolutionized Physics. You MUST pay homage to Einstein or they have the power to discredit you from academic circles and your grant.

Smart scientists just let it go, and concentrate of what they are interested in, ignoring Einstein totally, and his wacky theories.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Okay, WHY would the stationary observer NOT be the preferred frame, preytell? 

I did not make the rules here, Einsteins did.

HE said that there is no preferred frame in an inertial frame scenario.

Therefore H&K's data should also show the exact same results if I chose to call the west bound pane as being the stationary observer.  But of course IT DOES NOT WORK!

What in Einsteins reality, would cause you to imagine for a second that the Earth might be a suitable "stationary" reference frame for any experiment?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Earth is orbiting faster than the plane moves relative to earth's surface, however the plane is in the same orbit as the earth so the speeds are combined hence more weight when the plane accelerates! You have proper time T of the earth, and relative time t of the plane after reaching it's maximum velocity.

You're mistaking the word orbit and replacing it with spin in your doltage. 

 

Really? you are that stupid?

Which part of ORBIT, and SPIN, or Acceleration, or Gravitational forces, did you imagine constituted an "Inertial Frame" exactly?

(SR and its ultra precise math is ONLY applicable in a vacuum, NOT IN ANY GRAVITATIONAL REGION)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheProdigalProdigy said:

It doesn't matter what color your color your skin is!? There's a long history of racism/favoritism people are shallow. Everyone (from the prince of zimbabwe to the prince of bel'air would rather date Keira Knightley than any other female. Do you hate round faces? Yes. Do you like speak features? Yes. Were Elves not "Immortal, Wisest, and [b]fairest[/b]" in the LoTR film opening?  Yes. 

In a shallow world where people get treated according to looks rather than skills, yes racism is real af.

Except that this has absolutely nothing to do with Physics does it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Earth is orbiting faster than the plane moves relative to earth's surface, however the plane is in the same orbit as the earth so the speeds are combined hence more weight when the plane accelerates! You have proper time T of the earth, and relative time t of the plane after reaching it's maximum velocity.

You're mistaking the word orbit and replacing it with spin in your doltage. 

 

OK, think about this:

Lets apply Occam's razor again. its a good guide for things Physical.

What is more likely?

1/  Time shrinks, Solid objects shrink, but only in the direction they are moving, whilst at the same time as they are losing volume, they actually magically gain Mass from nowhere. And all this happened because some idiot that's not moving decides to watch it. And that's all it takes.

OR

2/ Einstein made a mistake somewhere in his hypothesis and/or math.  So really, nothing happens out of the ordinary when someone watches another object move.

Now you have to be really a religious nut case to chose option 1/.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

*Double quadruple facepalms*

 

What part of the plane pushing off the earth's surface using it's propellers and/or jets did you not factor into it the addition of inertias?

You are really an idiot.

SR math is ONLY applicable for Inertial Frames, in a vacuum, and not in a gravitation field. They used this math as-is when they were in NON inertial frames exclusively, under the influence of Gravity, whilst accelerating CONSTANTLY, (but at varying rates)

So their results MUST be made up nonsense, as they were applying the equations that were not applicable for their circumstances!

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

No but it clearly bothers you a lot more than anything else, perhaps you have some unresolved issues but I assure you racism is not my fault.

How can it bother me, when I never mentioned race once, it was all your doing, you can be the only one to blame for having some issue with races, which you have repeatedly spelled out. Look at yourself if you have a problem with races.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Time dilation!

"I did not make the rules here, Einsteins did.

HE said that there is no preferred frame in an inertial frame scenario."

Not true!

He compared gravity to being atop an accelerating surface like an elevator in space. The more that elevator accelerates the greater the force being exerted upon it's occupant. This causes time to tick slightly more slowly for that occupant. Time dilation! It was finally proven by the bending (not refraction) of light around the surface of the sun in Sir Arthur Edington's 1919 telescope observation! 

Again I have to remind you that you are an idiot.

Einstein explained his thinking about relativity using the elevator story.

But he does not use either Gravity, elevators or acceleration in his theory of Special relativity.

In fact, he SPECIFICALLY states that his theory ONLY IS APPLICABLE in the vacuum of space, away from any gravity, and only concerns straight line motion with no changes in velocity. So his exact math demands these conditions.

NONE of these conditions are present in the Airplane and clock experiment.

And EINSTEIN DID EXACTLY SAY that in SR, there CAN BE NO PREFERRED FRAME. About this he was adamant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Is gravity not the bending of space?

You need to go back to highschool man. We learned all this, algebra I was correcting you on for three pages and basic physics in highschool man.

I moved on to calculus, you didn't make it past algebra. We're not in the same genepool.

Do you understand that we are trying to discuss SR, right?  There is nothing about spacetime or gravity in the whole theory. Bending of spacetime, (a stupid claim) has nothing to do with SR.

I don't understand how you can be studying calculus, you seem a bit slow minded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

What did I say that was racist? That white people get treated better in America? That's like saying water is wet.

Exactly why would you think for a second that white people are treated any different that anyone else in America?

I cant see any discrepancy. I see people getting treated according to their actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually  I agree with Macropolo this time SR does not deal with gravity only with the changing of reference frames due to kinetic energy such as velocity, however Super Polymath I think you are thinking about GR now GR shows the effect that gravity has on time space, that the energy/mass of the object that generates gravity will also effect space's length and the amount of time measured for the object.

Edited by VictorMedvil
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

I literally explained that it was GR earlier in this thread.

I implicitly stated that SR had to do with matter telling space how to bend and bent space telling matter how to move n the other thread when talking about Marcos ridiculous anti-science rhetoric

No clue why you'd stab me in the back like I don't know this **** 😂😂

 

Well ya you must take GR and SR together you cannot just use one or the other they are both apart of the total view of relativity without one the other doesn't really make sense it gives a partial model of the universe only taking one of Einstein's Theories.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Well yeah, to a degree. It's gotten a little better.

the facts speak for themselves.

Black crimes are on the increase, in a massive way since Biden, and although blacks are still the minority, the majority of all violent crimes, rapes, shootings, holdups, beatings, muggings, theft, break-ins, domestic violence are done disproportionally by blacks.

So its not wonder that people are "wary" when they see a bunch of blacks of the corner.

Me, ill trust then as far a s I can throw them, untill I get to know individuals personally. A group of blacks? NFW

If you expect to be respected and equal, you gotta start acting as equals and demonstrate that you are respectful.

You cant demand equality. and you have to earn respect.

To be fair, there are disgusting examples of whites too, and they also are scorned by the rest, and by the blacks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

Actually  I agree with Macropolo this time SR does not deal with gravity only with the changing of reference frames due to kinetic energy such as velocity, however Super Polymath I think you are thinking about GR now GR shows the effect that gravity has on time space, that the energy/mass of the object that generates gravity will also effect space's length and the amount of time measured for the object.

I thought you had retired from this forum?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...