🚀 go-pugleaf

"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:_yzmh.269777$fy5.5777531@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
| 
| "Henri Wilson" <HW@....> wrote in message news:rvflp2ltoun34hcs762k0k596o7b5bu77h@4ax.com...
| > On Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:01:13 GMT, Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
| > wrote:
| > 
| >>Wolfgang G. Gasser wrote:
| >>> Two distant observers with each a (transversal) LIGHT CLOCK orbit at a
| >>> constant distance around their common center (assumed at rest).
| >>> 
| >>> Special relativity postulates that the light beams in both light clocks
| >>> propagate at c relative to both (almost inertially moving) observers.
| >>
| >>That is the key point -- these observers are NOT moving inertially. The 
| >>approximation is important (see below), and negates your claims.
| >>
| >>
| >>> This requires that for each observer the clock rate of the opposite clock
| >>> CAN be lower than the clock rate of his own clock.
| >>> Because of symmetry and unchanging distance, clock rate CANNOT differ.
| >>
| >>The error is in your gedanken, not in SR itself.
| >>
| >>For approximately inertial motion, the basic equations of SR are only 
| >>APPROXIMATELY valid. You ignored the approximation you, yourself, made.
| >>
| >>At a deeper level, however, such orbiting observers cannot be treated as 
| >>inertial observers, because a circle is different topologically from a 
| >>line. In SR's Minkowski spacetime, inertial observers move in straight 
| >>lines, not in circles, and the basic equations of SR are valid for 
| >>inertial observers and coordinates. Yes, for a very large radius a 
| >>circle is approximately a straight line for a small portion of its 
| >>circumference, but if one uses the fact it is a circle in any way, or 
| >>uses a large fraction of the circumference, then these are not inertial 
| >>observers, not even approximately.
| > 
| > So the GPS clocks that you claim prove SR correct move in straight lines do
| > they Snipper?
| 
| So the Henry Wilsons that you claim have a physics degree,
| don't really have much to show, do they?
|  http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/ForgedDegree.html
| 

Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:01:13 GMT, Tom Roberts wrote:

"the basic equations of SR are only APPROXIMATELY valid." - Roberts.

What a gem! That one is definitely a keeper. 




"In neither of these frames any form of acceleration is felt",  neither one of all three.
-- Dork Van de psycho.
Didn't they teach you to write English in Belgium? 
How old are you?
HAHAHA!