Learning Relativity in a Forum

Subject: Learning Relativity in a Forum
From: (Perfectly Innocent)
Date: 9/6/03 2:34 PM US Mountain Standard Time
Message-id:

(WaiteDavid137) wrote in message
...
As I've tried to tell you before, you don't have a derivation. You have a
transformation.

I have a transformation all right. I transform a Galilean
transformation into a Lorentz transformation. But you're forgetting
that I've proved Theorem 1: "Any two inertial frames of reference have
a Galilean synchronization." Using this legitimate theorem, I derive
SR. That makes my transformation a derivation.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity


You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I proved that a Gallilean
transformation can not relate two Cartesian frames for our 4d spacetime. If one
is Cartesian then the other is not.

(WaiteDavid137) wrote in message ...
Subject: Learning Relativity in a Forum
From: Perfectly Innocent
Date: 9/6/03 2:34 PM US Mountain Standard Time
Message-id:

(WaiteDavid137) wrote in message
...
As I've tried to tell you before, you don't have a derivation. You have a
transformation.

I have a transformation all right. I transform a Galilean
transformation into a Lorentz transformation. But you're forgetting
that I've proved Theorem 1: "Any two inertial frames of reference have
a Galilean synchronization." Using this legitimate theorem, I derive
SR. That makes my transformation a derivation.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity


... I proved that a Gallilean
transformation can not relate two Cartesian frames for our 4d spacetime.

Big deal. Cartesian frames are extremely limited. Inertial frames are not.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity

Eugene Shubert

(WaiteDavid137) wrote in message ...
Subject: Learning Relativity in a Forum
From: Perfectly Innocent
Date: 9/7/2003 11:48 PM US Mountain Standard Time
Message-id:

I have a transformation all right. I transform a Galilean
transformation into a Lorentz transformation. But you're forgetting
that I've proved Theorem 1: "Any two inertial frames of reference have
a Galilean synchronization." Using this legitimate theorem, I derive
SR. That makes my transformation a derivation.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity

... I proved that a Gallilean
transformation can not relate two Cartesian frames for our 4d spacetime.

Big deal.

It's more insightful to derive the Lorentz transformation from the
Galilean transformation. In going that route, it's possible to avoid
the physical irrelevance and subterfuge of cartesianality and
orthogonality.

Cartesian frames are extremely limited. Inertial frames are not.

In my approach, physical insight is revealed, not entombed and buried
in dead yet revered formalism.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity

Eugene Shubert