My immediately previous post was not stated plainly enough. Anyone who choses to represent themself with the image of a young child must be respected as knowing their intellectual age and so must have important things explained to them as plainly as possible.
Originally Trelirium started a thread in which it claimed that Special Relativity could be proved to have time transformation but NOT mass transformation.
Originally Trelirium posted a mathamatical "proof" in a thread titled "Mass does not change with speed", or something like that.
I believed that Trelirium's conjecture was wrong.
I opened this thread to refute Trelirium's conjecture. I claimed that Special Relativity loses self consistency when mass transformation is denied.
The point of my thread is to show that mass must be transformed in Special Relativity if SR has any chance of being valid.
Anyone who insists that mass must must be transformed by this or that machination in keeping with Einstein Relativity is simply proving MY point: Einstein Relativity is invalid if mass transformation is denied and/or is mathematically proven wrong.
Is there a thread administrater who is such a careless reader that he cannot get the meaning of very plainly written wording?
Is there a thread administrater who cannot accurately understand very plainly written wording?
Give me three guesses and I bet I can rat him out.
Originally Trelirium started a thread in which it claimed that Special Relativity could be proved to have time transformation but NOT mass transformation.
Originally Trelirium posted a mathamatical "proof" in a thread titled "Mass does not change with speed", or something like that.
I believed that Trelirium's conjecture was wrong.
I opened this thread to refute Trelirium's conjecture. I claimed that Special Relativity loses self consistency when mass transformation is denied.
The point of my thread is to show that mass must be transformed in Special Relativity if SR has any chance of being valid.
Anyone who insists that mass must must be transformed by this or that machination in keeping with Einstein Relativity is simply proving MY point: Einstein Relativity is invalid if mass transformation is denied and/or is mathematically proven wrong.
Is there a thread administrater who is such a careless reader that he cannot get the meaning of very plainly written wording?
Is there a thread administrater who cannot accurately understand very plainly written wording?
Give me three guesses and I bet I can rat him out.