WHO IS WELCOME TO TRY TO KILL SPECIAL RELATIVITY?

[Peter Webb]

Androcles wrote in message ...

What kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

He never said that at all.

Thank you.
Web page updated.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/QUESTION.htm

Your "quote" is still wrong, because it leaves out the words "by
definition"; by cutting out these words you grossly misrepresent what
Einstein said in his paper.

You wouldn't want to misrepresent what he actually said, would you? So why
not fix this as well?

[glird]

On May 3, 12:59 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
<What kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same? >

Both x and x' are in the domain of the function
x$B"*(B x' such that x' = x-vt"

As usual, Androcles didn't understand what I wrote on the newsgroup
or in email notes to him. Here is a summary of both.
<Andy: For my part I shall continue to assume 1+1=2 and refuse to
assume that the "time" required by light to travel from A to B equals
the "time" it requires to travel from B to A, much preferring that the
"time" required by a turtle to travel from A to B equals twice the
"time" an elephant requires to travel from B to A. >

Glird: Your gif has a picture of equation # 1:
.5[tau(0,0,0,t)+tau(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'(c+v)]
= tau[x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v)]
In terms of esynched k clocks, Einstein's
".5(tau_0 + tau_2) = tau_1"
(which is what the equation describes) is correct. The "inequality"
implied in the second and third portions of eq 1':
.5[tau(0,0,0,t)+tau(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'(c+v)]
= tau[x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v)] Eq 1'
= tau[0,0,0,t + x'/(c+v)],
is due to YOUR misunderstanding of what "tau[" means. YOU think it
means that "half the total time is equal to the outbound time which is
equal to the inbound time"; so for the past 10 months have repeatedly
asked,
<What kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same? >
Whether deliberately or ignorantly, you fail to recognize that Eq 1
(and 1') does NOT say that the "time" tau (of the moving system) "is
EQUAL to
AB/(c +/- v)"! They were giving tau AS A FUNCTION OF t.

glird

[qartl]

Post by glird
<What kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same? >

Both x and x' are in the domain of the function
x$B"*(B x' such that x' = x-vt"

As usual, Androcles didn't understand what I wrote on the newsgroup
or in email notes to him. Here is a summary of both.
<Andy: For my part I shall continue to assume 1+1=2 and refuse to
assume that the "time" required by light to travel from A to B equals
the "time" it requires to travel from B to A, much preferring that the
"time" required by a turtle to travel from A to B equals twice the
"time" an elephant requires to travel from B to A. >
.5[tau(0,0,0,t)+tau(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'(c+v)]
= tau[x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v)]
In terms of esynched k clocks, Einstein's
".5(tau_0 + tau_2) = tau_1"
(which is what the equation describes) is correct. The "inequality"
.5[tau(0,0,0,t)+tau(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v)+x'(c+v)]
= tau[x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v)] Eq 1'
= tau[0,0,0,t + x'/(c+v)],
is due to YOUR misunderstanding of what "tau[" means. YOU think it
means that "half the total time is equal to the outbound time which is
equal to the inbound time"; so for the past 10 months have repeatedly
asked,
<What kind of lunacy prompted Einstein to say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same? >
Whether deliberately or ignorantly, you fail to recognize that Eq 1
(and 1') does NOT say that the "time" tau (of the moving system) "is
EQUAL to
AB/(c +/- v)"! They were giving tau AS A FUNCTION OF t.
glird

Androcles is playing juvenile games with followups, newsgroups restored.