constancy of light
On May 6, 4:34�pm, YBM wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
...
No, you have no answer to the use of velocities, so you claim it is a
violation of some kind or some kind of heresy against science.
You can continue to be stupid and ignorant if you like... but, please,
stop lying, especially when the proofs of your lies resides a few posts
above.
Lies? What do you claim I am lying about? I am going to continue to
use velocity of light and the Galilean transformation equations. You
scientists go ahead and do your thing with the Lorentz equations. I
really don't believe there is a distance contraction. I told you the
absolute truth about that.
Robert B. Winn
|