Go away loser.
Is a length contraction just a visual thing?
- Thread starter absolute-space
- Start date
absolute-space
Registered Member
I''ll be banned god troll, but you and your god troll friends will not stop me getting published and destroying reality.
Go away loser.
again--why are you not a secrete government scientist? or why have you not been scouted for your " final parts to the jigsaw ?"
Not before time. sad though that threads of this type need to continue on under the guise of science for so long, when it is painfully obvious to all what is going on, virtually from the OP. 25 PAGES...SAD!
oh, you are correct-- it does say " to be continued "--
(shakes head)--what a massive pathetic joke you truly are.absolute-space
Registered Member
I bet you h ate the student is going to become the master.......
absolute-space
Registered Member
I am obviously saving key points for my paper I am not going to post it on wordpress am i .oh, you are correct-- it does say " to be continued "--
uh-huh.. whatever, that you need to tell yourself.it is as simple as this, if you actually had any talent or " final parts to the jigsaw " you would have been scouted years ago--when you first initiated this pathetic, piss-ant shiit.
absolute-space
Registered Member
How would I make any bucks if I give it away, I am not in this for my health, I always succeed at a job, its just another job.
just too reiterate,uh-huh.. whatever, that you need to tell yourself.
it is as simple as this, if you actually had any talent or " final parts to the jigsaw " you would have been scouted years ago--when you first initiated this pathetic, piss-ant shiit.
absolute-space
Registered Member
I could hardly write a sentence years ago.
uh-huh.. whatever, that you need to tell yourself.
it is as simple as this, if you actually had any talent or " final parts to the jigsaw " you would have been scouted years ago--when you first initiated this pathetic, piss-ant shiit.
Lol, seriously?!? You actually think you are writing a paper?! That's hilarious!
Correct and all three can be acting at the same time on an emitting source of line radiation. The expansion of space, each Km of it, means that for very distant sources the cosmological red shift dominates all others - I. e. there are no very distant objects with a blue shift - This is yet another proof that the universe is expanding.
When the redshift of light is observed due to an objects motion, it is a Doppler effect.
When a redshift of light is observed as light climbs out of a gravity well, it is a gravitational redshift.
When a redshift of light is observed due to the intervening space expanding, it is a cosmological redshift.
Take any two greatly separated objects and even if both are with local velocity towards each other (large Doppler blue shift) the expansion of the universe will overwhelm that blue shift. One of the two objects could be the Earth and it is fact, that we don't see any blue shifted objects, not one, which are far away.
If there were no expansion of the universe, then there should be, even among distant pairs, essentially an equal number of red and blue shifted objects.*
Not that yet another proof of the expansion of the universe is needed.
* This refers to their spectral lines; not their general color corrected for the cosmological / expansion of the universe / shift/ The very distant objects (galaxies) were made up of the first stars to form as we are looking back into the distant past. Those stars were forming when the universe was much smaller and had larger H2 gas clouds to form from. - Most were huge compared to the sun (many more than 100 times more massive!) Big stars burn up their fuel faster and die. Their surfaces were hotter so non-line continuium radiation was probably shorter wave length as it left the star. Probably none of these early stars still exist. Their line radiation is from atomic hydrogen and it is richer in balmer series red line and UV (transitions to the ground state called the lyman series lines). Quite possibly only the 2 to 1 (ground state), a 10.2 ev line, can be seen, now in the IR.
Last edited:
I guess some things never change.
And let's not forget you're still clueless about even the most basic math and science!
This question was directly answered in post #62 where calculations with the Lorentz transform demonstrate that the definition of length, the definition of simultaneity, the definition of co-moving require that length can actually change when you change which inertial motion you use as your standard for deciding what is the meaning of "at rest" and "simultaneous."
Importantly, length contraction has nothing to do with issues of perspective and vision. It's about definitions and standards.
The question in the OP was about the physics described by the Lorentz transform. Thus it can be answered without reference to the actual behavior of the universe -- we only need the model of the universe. Your assertions about perspective is without basis, does not address the math of perspective calculations, and does not address the definition:
Length of an object in inertial motion is the absolute difference in position between the two endpoints at the same time.
Your argument is math based ; what of reality .
To the Universe OUR perspective ; is just this ; our perspective ; and so is the mathematics .
Baseless assumption. Length contraction and time dilation are both real in each FoR they are measured, and each FoR is as valid as the other. Basic SR.