Universal Velocity $B#1(B (continued from "Beautifil Formula")

In the process of getting beautiful formula (6), I noticed the
existence of universal velocity. What does it mean?
To be simple, we think two inertial coordinate frames S1(x1,t1) and
S2(x2,t2), moving on a line at a relative velocity of v. The axes of
x1 and x2 are aranged in a same direction, and origins of S1 and S2
are made coincident(t1=x1=t2=x2=0).
As the motion of S2 origin(x2=0) is expressed as x1=v*t1 in the S1
coordinate, x2 has the factor (x1-v*t1) by factor theorem. Therefore
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx2=$B&C(B(v)(x1-v*t1)$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B $B!!(B(1)
The motion of inertial coordinate frame S3 which moves opposite
direction to S2 at the velocity of -v is expressed as follows,
replacing v as -v at (1).
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx2=$B&C(B(-v)(x1+v*t1)$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B(2)
There are n inertial coordinate frames 1,2,...,n, moving on a line,
and their relative velocities are v1,v2,...,vn. vi is the velocity
from frame i to frame i+1. vn is the velocity from frame n to frame
1.
The relation of (1) is developed on i=1,2,...,n, defying j=i+1, and
when i=n, j-=1.
$B!!!!!!!!(Bxj=$B&C(B(vi)(xi-vi*ti) $B!!!!(B (1i)
Similarly to (2) like (1i)
$B!!!!(B xj=$B&C(B(-vi)(xi+vi*ti) $B!!(B(2i)
At (1i) and (2i) i=1$B!A(Bn, multiplying both sides, and eliminating
$B&C(B(vi)=$B&C(B(-vi),
$B!!!!!!!!(B(x1-v1*t1)(x2-v2*t2)$B!&!&!&(B(xn-vn*tn)=(x1+v1*t1)(x2+v2*t2)$B!&!&!&(B(xn+vn*tn)
$B!!!!!!(B(3)
seeing the process of getting (3), if any vi and vj would be replaced,
the equation could be composed. Writing ahead i and j terms at (3),
$B!!!!!!!!(B(xi-vi*ti)(xj-vj*tj)$B!&!&!&(B=(xi+vi*ti)(xj+vj*tj)$B!&!&!&!! !!!!!!(B(3)'
$B!&!&!&(B shows unchanged part of (3). Replacing vi and vj,
$B!!!!!!!!(B(xi-vj*ti)(xj-vi*tj)$B!&!&!&(B=(xi+vj*ti)(xj+vi*tj)$B!&!&!&!! !!!!!!(B(4)
Compairing (3)' and (4) introduces xi/ti=xj/tj and concequently next
relation.
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx1/t1=xi/ti=xn/tn=$B!^(BC [universal velocity] $B!!!!!!!!(B $B!!(B(5)
Finaly all frames have a common universal velocity =$B!^(BC . Applying (5)
to (3)
$B!!!!!!!!(B(C-v1)(C-v2)$B!&!&!&(B(C-vn) = (C+v1)(C+v2)$B!&!&!&(B(C+vn) $B!!(B (6)
This beautiful formula expresses the general law of velocity
composition. When n=3, law of velocity composition -v3=(v1+v2)/
(1+v1*v2/c^2) is obtained. The meaning of this formula is, when -
CviC (i=1$B!A(Bn-1), then -CvnC. Relative velocity v can not exceed
universal velocity C, in other words C is the upper limit velocity of
v.
I will show you another way of proof of universal velocity next week.

H.Fujimori from Japan

wrote in message
...
| Universal Velocity $B#1(B (continued from "Beautifil Formula")
|
| In the process of getting beautiful formula (6), I noticed the
| existence of universal velocity. What does it mean?

It means you are a crank, a raving lunatic, an idiot.
*plonk*

wrote in message

Universal Velocity $B#1(B (continued from "Beautifil Formula")

[snip]

I will show you another way of proof of universal velocity next week.

Will you use a font that shows up as legible characters
for the rest of the world?

On Jun 24, 10:21 am, wrote:
Universal Velocity $B#1(B (continued from "Beautifil Formula")

In the process of getting beautiful formula (6), I noticed the
existence of universal velocity. What does it mean?
To be simple, we think two inertial coordinate frames S1(x1,t1) and
S2(x2,t2), moving on a line at a relative velocity of v. The axes of
x1 and x2 are aranged in a same direction, and origins of S1 and S2
are made coincident(t1=x1=t2=x2=0).
As the motion of S2 origin(x2=0) is expressed as x1=v*t1 in the S1
coordinate, x2 has the factor (x1-v*t1) by factor theorem. Therefore
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx2=$B&C(B(v)(x1-v*t1)$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B $B!!(B(1)
The motion of inertial coordinate frame S3 which moves opposite
direction to S2 at the velocity of -v is expressed as follows,
replacing v as -v at (1).
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx2=$B&C(B(-v)(x1+v*t1)$B!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(B(2)
There are n inertial coordinate frames 1,2,...,n, moving on a line,
and their relative velocities are v1,v2,...,vn. vi is the velocity
from frame i to frame i+1. vn is the velocity from frame n to frame
1.
The relation of (1) is developed on i=1,2,...,n, defying j=i+1, and
when i=n, j-=1.
$B!!!!!!!!(Bxj=$B&C(B(vi)(xi-vi*ti) $B!!!!(B (1i)
Similarly to (2) like (1i)
$B!!!!(B xj=$B&C(B(-vi)(xi+vi*ti) $B!!(B(2i)
At (1i) and (2i) i=1$B!A(Bn, multiplying both sides, and eliminating
$B&C(B(vi)=$B&C(B(-vi),
$B!!!!!!!!(B(x1-v1*t1)(x2-v2*t2)$B!&!&!&(B(xn-vn*tn)=(x1+v1*t1)(x2+v2*t2)$B!&!&!&(B(xn+vn*tn)
$B!!!!!!(B(3)
seeing the process of getting (3), if any vi and vj would be replaced,
the equation could be composed. Writing ahead i and j terms at (3),
$B!!!!!!!!(B(xi-vi*ti)(xj-vj*tj)$B!&!&!&(B=(xi+vi*ti)(xj+vj*tj)$B!&!&!&!! !!!!!!(B(3)'
$B!&!&!&(B shows unchanged part of (3). Replacing vi and vj,
$B!!!!!!!!(B(xi-vj*ti)(xj-vi*tj)$B!&!&!&(B=(xi+vj*ti)(xj+vi*tj)$B!&!&!&!! !!!!!!(B(4)
Compairing (3)' and (4) introduces xi/ti=xj/tj and concequently next
relation.
$B!!!!!!!!(Bx1/t1=xi/ti=xn/tn=$B!^(BC [universal velocity] $B!!!!!!!!(B $B!!(B(5)
Finaly all frames have a common universal velocity =$B!^(BC . Applying (5)
to (3)
$B!!!!!!!!(B(C-v1)(C-v2)$B!&!&!&(B(C-vn) = (C+v1)(C+v2)$B!&!&!&(B(C+vn) $B!!(B (6)
This beautiful formula expresses the general law of velocity
composition. When n=3, law of velocity composition -v3=(v1+v2)/
(1+v1*v2/c^2) is obtained. The meaning of this formula is, when -
CviC (i=1$B!A(Bn-1), then -CvnC. Relative velocity v can not exceed
universal velocity C, in other words C is the upper limit velocity of
v.
I will show you another way of proof of universal velocity next week.

H.Fujimori from Japan

xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

Did you ever stand back/away from the universe and look at it that way?

xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. *However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

On Jun 26, 10:28*am, wrote:
xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. *However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

xxein: Not with gravity.

"xxein" wrote in message
...
On Jun 26, 10:28 am, wrote:
xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

xxein: Not with gravity.

Of course not, but what about with artefactual/superficially imposed
yin-yangs of sorts ?

On Jun 26, 8:32*pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"xxein" wrote in message

...
On Jun 26, 10:28 am, wrote:

xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

xxein: *Not with gravity.

Of course not, but what about with artefactual/superficially imposed
yin-yangs of sorts ?

xxein: You have no idea of how it affects you, do you? Science
cannot be put forward as the one-trick pony you attempt to describe.

Yin-yangs is metaphoric referrence reference to how we structure a
physics (the physic) in our minds. It is not necessarily true, but
that is how we perceive it.

We will always be able to redefine this understanding (as yin yang in
its proper physical function) as long as you stay out of the way and
let us proceed without your stupid interference.

No belief can out-mode science, itself.

On Jun 28, 6:00*pm, xxein wrote:
On Jun 26, 8:32*pm, "Androcles" wrote:





"xxein" wrote in message

....
On Jun 26, 10:28 am, wrote:

xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

xxein: *Not with gravity.

Of course not, but what about with artefactual/superficially imposed
yin-yangs of sorts ?

xxein: *You have no idea of how it affects you, do you? *Science
cannot be put forward as the one-trick pony you attempt to describe.

Yin-yangs is metaphoric referrence reference to how we structure a
physics (the physic) in our minds. *It is not necessarily true, but
that is how we perceive it.

We will always be able to redefine this understanding (as yin yang in
its proper physical function) as long as you stay out of the way and
let us proceed without your stupid interference.

No belief can out-mode science, itself.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

A safe relativistic velocity is Gamma 3.

"xxein" wrote in message
...
On Jun 26, 8:32 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
"xxein" wrote in message

...
On Jun 26, 10:28 am, wrote:

xxein: You have captured a moment of truth. However, it is still a
subjective measurement.

I have expected this kind of criticism, and this proof is not perfect
as you say.
I think formula (6) shows principle of constancy of light velocity.

xxein: Not with gravity.

Of course not, but what about with artefactual/superficially imposed
yin-yangs of sorts ?

xxein: You have no idea of how it affects you, do you? Science
cannot be put forward as the one-trick pony you attempt to describe.

Yin-yangs is metaphoric referrence reference
===================================
Ah, I see. So what you really mean is artefactual/superficially imposed
metaphoric referrence references of sorts.

Can you explain what referrence references refer to for me?