"Gregory L. Hansen" wrote in message
...
In article ,
eleaticus wrote:

"David McAnally" wrote in message
...

The transformation law for the differential operators under the
Galilean
transformation is given by:

d/dt' = d/dt + v d/dx,

Tell us how there can be a d/dt' when there is no t'? When the
Newton-theoretical lack of a time transform is honored when treating
Newton-theoretical transforms, which are the subject matter in
discussion?

eleaticus

In general, a transform has x'(x,y,z,t), y'(x,y,z,t), z'(x,y,z,t),
t'(x,y,z,t). That is, each new coordinate is a function of all of the old
coordinates. In a typical Newtonian transformation we have t'=t, but
that's a special case.

In the most prosaic Newtonian time transformation, we simply add an offset
to put t'=0 somewhere convenient, t'=t-t0. Or we could scale the
coordinate to go to a different time standard with a different rate of
ticking, t'=kt.

Less prosaically, stick with a universal time and transform to a frame
rotating with angular velocity w relative to the stationary frame. Then
we have, for a vector V,

dV/dt' = dV/dt + w cross V

See Goldstein, chapter 4.

Thanks for the post Hansen, but it misses the point, perhaps because you
missed posts here.

In Newtonian terms there is no time transform, so acting as if there were
has no functional purpose but to introduce a spurious new variable with
which to decide that a Newtonian-theoretical transform is not invariant.

On the other hand, velocity v definitely is not invariant under the
transformations; it is relative to one of the coordinate systems.

L = x0 + ut.

x0 becomes x0-vt and ut becomes (v-u) in the second system.

Yet, y'all do not include v in your list of transformations and xform-based
operators.

Why? The only excuse is that it is not a transformed coordinate and it is
transformed coordinates under discussion.

Just so, under the Newtonian premise time is absolute, there is no time
transform, and there is no reason outside of obstinate insistence on doing
it in a way that reaches a dogmatic conclusion by pretending there is a time
transform. t=t in all systems.

Just what is so hard about giving poor old Newton his 'props'? Why is it so
hard to give him his premise when discussing something based on his premise?

You KNOW that the operators McAnally (et al) give are not based on giving
Newton his premise. You KNOW they are demonstrably not the operators you
would derive without the spurious t'=t.

If you are truly honest and interested in truth, you can show McAnally/etc
that as fact. Show us all the operators that ensue from giving Newton his
premise.

eleaticus

--
"What are the possibilities of small but movable machines? They may or
may not be useful, but they surely would be fun to make."
-- Richard P. Feynman, 1959

"robert j. kolker" wrote in message
...


eleaticus wrote:


He says there is a time transform under Newton, I say there isn't. You
agree
with me and insult me for it?

It is the -identity- transform, stupid.

No, it is not, idiot. The identity transform is t=t which introduces no
spurious terms into the analysis.

If you weren't too stupid and ignorant I'd suggest you devise the
transformation operators using the actual identity transform so you could
see that there is a tremendous difference.

But, alas, you are both too stupid and too ignorant so ... sigh.

eleaticus


Bob Kolker

eleaticus wrote:

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...

Newton was empirically wrong, you empirical idiot. Hey stooopid -
tell us the GPS system does not work.

To quote myself:
[snip crap]

Newton was empirically wrong, you empirical idiot. Hey stooopid -
tell us the GPS system does not work.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

eleaticus wrote:

"robert j. kolker" wrote in message
...


eleaticus wrote:
[snip crap]

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html


--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

eleaticus wrote:

"robert j. kolker" wrote in message
...


eleaticus wrote:
[snip crap]

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

eleaticus wrote:
[snip crap]

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html
http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...
Newton was empirically wrong, you empirical idiot. Hey stooopid -
tell us the GPS system does not work.

To quote myself:
Focus well on negative 'responses'. Are they vicious ranting? Are the
replies actually responsive? Do they rant about gravity, or how Relativity
is proved correct a million times each day, or some other 'we are proved
right' rave that doesn't deal in details about the debunking done here? It
is typically General Relativity or items about the energy and mass of moving
objects that are being waved at you, and such items are completely
irrelevant to coordinate transformations and invariance..

Just ask them for a list of all the observations that have been made of the
shortening (contraction) of moving objects that Special Relativity says
always occurs.

eleaticus

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

To quote myself:

Focus well on negative 'responses'. Are they vicious ranting? Are the
replies actually responsive? Do they rant about gravity, or how Relativity
is proved correct a million times each day, or some other 'we are proved
right' rave that doesn't deal in details about the debunking done here? It
is typically General Relativity or items about the energy and mass of moving
objects that are being waved at you, and such items are completely
irrelevant to coordinate transformations and invariance..

Just ask them for a list of all the observations that have been made of the
shortening (contraction) of moving objects that Special Relativity says
always occurs.

eleaticus

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

To quote myself:

Focus well on negative 'responses'. Are they vicious ranting? Are the
replies actually responsive? Do they rant about gravity, or how Relativity
is proved correct a million times each day, or some other 'we are proved
right' rave that doesn't deal in details about the debunking done here? It
is typically General Relativity or items about the energy and mass of moving
objects that are being waved at you, and such items are completely
irrelevant to coordinate transformations and invariance..

Just ask them for a list of all the observations that have been made of the
shortening (contraction) of moving objects that Special Relativity says
always occurs.

eleaticus

"Uncle Al" wrote in message
...

Hey stooopid - tell us the GPS system does not work.

To quote myself:

Focus well on negative 'responses'. Are they vicious ranting? Are the
replies actually responsive? Do they rant about gravity, or how Relativity
is proved correct a million times each day, or some other 'we are proved
right' rave that doesn't deal in details about the debunking done here? It
is typically General Relativity or items about the energy and mass of moving
objects that are being waved at you, and such items are completely
irrelevant to coordinate transformations and invariance..

Just ask them for a list of all the observations that have been made of the
shortening (contraction) of moving objects that Special Relativity says
always occurs.

eleaticus