mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-11 19:59:57 UTC

Reply

PermalinkHow big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

Discussion:

Add Reply

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-11 19:59:57 UTC

Reply

PermalinkHow big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

Emmet Kahl

2021-09-12 20:39:29 UTC

Reply

PermalinkThe astronaut has to shrink... but his atomic chemistry would be

affected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

you mix tutifruti, there are 2 kind, a one because the speed, then theaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both as much

as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-13 01:15:02 UTC

Reply

PermalinkThe astronaut has to shrink... but his atomic chemistry would be

affected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

you mix tutifruti, there are 2 kind, a one because the speed, then theaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both as much

as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

Mitchell Raemsch

Loyd Catt

2021-09-13 12:18:28 UTC

Reply

PermalinkThe astronaut has to shrink... but his atomic chemistry would be

affected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

you mix tutifruti, there are 2 kind, a one because the speed, then theaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both as much

as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-14 18:36:27 UTC

Reply

Permalinkaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal both

sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both as much

as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

Mitchell Raemsch

Gale Binz

2021-09-14 21:14:31 UTC

Reply

Permalinkaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal

both sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

the other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both

as much as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-15 00:27:20 UTC

Reply

Permalinkaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal

both sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

the other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both

as much as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

Mitchell Raemsch

Python

2021-09-15 01:29:10 UTC

Reply

Permalinkaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal

both sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

the other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both

as much as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-15 17:49:30 UTC

Reply

Permalinkaffected. That should not happen. Is length contraction real?

If relativity is a shared separation and converging back equal

both sides would have the equal speed length contraction.

the other because the curvature gradient (perpendicular). Real both

as much as it can be, and it nothing to do with chemistry.

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

Mitchell Raemsch

of length contracting. Or show otherwise....

Why would you be afraid?

Mitchell Raemsch

Gale Binz

2021-09-15 15:08:52 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-15 17:52:35 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

to do it you? Why would you be the exception?

Hardy Kuhn

2021-09-15 20:31:45 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

be the exception?

not mistaken, telemeter and the process telemetry. Let me watch your

meterstick.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-15 21:40:03 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

be the exception?

What about a space ship?

Mitchell Raemsch

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-16 00:36:35 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

be the exception?

What about a space ship?

Mitchell Raemsch

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

Michael Moroney

2021-09-16 02:02:17 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

be the exception?

What about a space ship?

Mitchell Raemsch

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary and the astronaut and atoms are not squished. However the

astronaut will observe the rest of the universe as being squished!

If you weren't such a chicken, you could google that and actually learn

something for once in your miserable life. But you won't, so you won't.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-16 02:52:58 UTC

Reply

Permalinkit's about the observations, not changes in chemical reactions or

consistence just by observing it. Think.

It is not real...

be the exception?

What about a space ship?

Mitchell Raemsch

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

The space ship beginning to move will feel weight...

that is the difference.

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

2021-09-16 06:49:18 UTC

Reply

PermalinkEither length contraction is real or it is not.

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

Maciej Wozniak

2021-09-16 07:45:34 UTC

Reply

PermalinkOnce the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

scenarios may observe gedanken wonders of Giant

Guru, but in the meantime in the real world the real clocks

of the real GPS keep indicating t'=t, just like all serious

clocks always did.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-16 16:58:41 UTC

Reply

PermalinkEither length contraction is real or it is not.

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

Voyager are slowing down subject to gravity leaving the Solar system.

If gravity is everywhere affecting motion there are no inertial frames.

Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not

steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.

Show what speeds are steady if you can...

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

2021-09-17 21:28:39 UTC

Reply

PermalinkEither length contraction is real or it is not.

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

acceleration, so the force is not from gravity, so it's not weight.

This is a mistake you always make, is English not your first language?

Anyway, the ship is cruising at constant speed so not accelerating at

all so there is no force in the situation I'm discussing.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

and marvel at the length contracted universe whiz by out the window.

be considered stationary relative to itself, so anything inertial can be

used as a reference for stationary. So it's valid for my

(non-accelerating) spacecraft to consider itself stationary.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

There are always inertial frames. Trying to make an object stationary

(inertial) in one may or may not be easy. If there are no other forces

on the object and the graviting masses are so distant there is no

gradient then they are in free fall and locally inertial.

Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not

steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.

Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.

(*) The Voyagers are moving away from the sun and exceed escape velocity

so yes, they'll never fall toward the sun but free fall is the correct term.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-18 00:42:23 UTC

Reply

PermalinkEither length contraction is real or it is not.

And it is not... universal distance cannot go away...

it does expand instead... and that is measured

to be accelerating.

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Anyway, the ship is cruising at constant speed so not accelerating at

all so there is no force in the situation I'm discussing.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

That self stillness never applies always...

Nothing is absolutely stationary, correct. But anything (inertial) can

be considered stationary relative to itself, so anything inertial can be

used as a reference for stationary. So it's valid for my

(non-accelerating) spacecraft to consider itself stationary.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

There are always inertial frames. Trying to make an object stationary

(inertial) in one may or may not be easy. If there are no other forces

on the object and the graviting masses are so distant there is no

gradient then they are in free fall and locally inertial.

Einstein got inertial frames wrong because motion's in general are not

steady. As a rule speed is always subject to change instead.

Any time there is zero force. See Newton, Roy.

What about the space station's zero gravity?

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

Can you prove that?

They will be slowing down...

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

2021-09-18 02:23:17 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-18 17:05:12 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

If you haven't measured it you cannot use it...

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

2021-09-19 02:53:00 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.

Hey Roy, shouldn't you be worried that your God will stop creating

gravity just long enough to toss you into hell because of all of your

lies? There you can join your buddy, Roy Masters. Unless you really are

Roy Masters. Who else can lie as much as you do?

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-20 18:04:14 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.

How do you know their data is accurate?

How do you know any drop off gravity in that way?

Mitchell Raemsch

Michael Moroney

2021-09-20 18:30:48 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.

Because the grand tour paths of the Voyagers actually worked for one,

Smitch. If the data were inaccurate it wouldn't work, Smitch.

Please translate that last one into English.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-20 19:07:22 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary

Begin to move and you like a spaceship know you are moving.

accelerating. After any acceleration has been done.

You mean force. Again that involves acceleration.

It is from the ships propulsion instead.

The weight side is not always with the real force.

Once the ship reaches a cruising speed and no longer accelerates, it is

inertial and the astronaut in the ship can consider himself stationary

front of the spaceship he's not stationary relative to it? Good grief.

Again, English, please.

Yes, and...? Since there are no other forces on the Voyagers, they are

in "free fall" relative to the sun* so they are locally inertial.

and science is to look at possible sources of error and in a thought

experiment you can consider them zero. So a spaceship considering itself

stationary in a thought experiment can ignore gravity, just assume it's

far enough away that it can be ignored.

Isn't gravity supposed to be everywhere you moron?

amount of gravity.

What about it? It's because of freefall.

It still has a gravity field. It is not zero gravity it

is weightlessness instead...

about an inertial spaceship, far enough from any gravity source its

effect is trivial.

Yes. Google their current distances, their velocities at that distance,

then calculate the sun's escape velocity at that distance. You can do

the math yourself.

I can always use the numbers measured or calculated by someone else, Roy.

Because the grand tour paths of the Voyagers actually worked for one,

Smitch. If the data were inaccurate it wouldn't work, Smitch.

Please translate that last one into English.

And it does not...

Mitchell Raemsch

Maciej Wozniak

2021-09-20 19:31:21 UTC

Reply

Permalinkinstruments" are pretty useless junk when it comes to serious

measurement.

Maciej Wozniak

2021-09-16 04:25:50 UTC

Reply

PermalinkMitch, you Roy Masters, in the frame of the spaceship, the spaceship is

stationary and the astronaut and atoms are not squished. However the

astronaut will observe the rest of the universe as being squished!

In the meantime in the real world, however, the clocks of GPS keep

indicating t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

Sylvia Else

2021-09-13 01:36:43 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

Sylvia.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-13 02:29:52 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

Sylvia Else

2021-09-13 02:35:43 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame. It is certainly real in that

sense, but it still is not a change to the object.

As an everyday example, the angle subtended by an object in your eye

reduces as the object gets further away. That reduction is real and

measurable, but the object is unaffected.

Sylvia.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-13 02:39:18 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame.

like the Twin paradox?

What Can you show that contraction is real?

No. You are a moron instead...

Mitchell Raemsch

Sylvia Else

2021-09-13 02:52:36 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame.

like the Twin paradox?

What Can you show that contraction is real?

No. You are a moron instead...

resort to insults.

Sylvia.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-13 03:06:43 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame.

like the Twin paradox?

What Can you show that contraction is real?

No. You are a moron instead...

resort to insults.

Sylvia.

Where is your evidence for your claim that length contraction is real?

Mitchell Raemsch

Sylvia Else

2021-09-13 04:35:40 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame.

like the Twin paradox?

What Can you show that contraction is real?

No. You are a moron instead...

resort to insults.

Sylvia.

Where is your evidence for your claim that length contraction is real?

Oops!

Sylvia.

mitchr...@gmail.com

2021-09-13 02:46:48 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame. It is certainly real in that

sense, but it still is not a change to the object.

As an everyday example, the angle subtended by an object in your eye

reduces as the object gets further away. That reduction is real and

measurable, but the object is unaffected.

Sylvia.

Mitchell Raemsch

Sylvia Else

2021-09-15 01:31:47 UTC

Reply

Permalinkthe original room in it would shrink.

How big does it have to be before

accelerating... for the astronaut?

Mitchell Raemsch

relativity says.

and it is not...

Mitchell Raemsch

one frame as measured from another frame. It is certainly real in that

sense, but it still is not a change to the object.

As an everyday example, the angle subtended by an object in your eye

reduces as the object gets further away. That reduction is real and

measurable, but the object is unaffected.

Sylvia.

Mitchell Raemsch

you have revealed yourself to be a troll. I can't be bothered with you

any more.

Sylvia.

Loading...