Richard Hachel
2024-12-16 12:22:32 UTC
Reply
Permalinkand what a "relativistic synchronization method" is.
It seems especially that even Einstein, don't laugh friends, did not
understand it, but attacking a living God to denounce him is not easy.
We must always, in all things, try to be fair, try to be true.
It is fair to say that Albert Einstein postulates, without explaining it,
the invariance of the speed of the speed of light. It is a postulate.
For Hachel, postulating is not enough. We must explain, at the base, why.
Doctor Hachel, blessed be he and accepted in the Holy Lands of
Aôôôllah, peace be upon him, speaks of a universal anisochrony, and
claims, blessed be he and accepted in the Holy Lands of Aôôôllah, peace
be upon him.
The principle is there, and if we affirm that any receiver receives live,
in perfect cosmic simultaneity, in its hyperplane, any electromagnetic
signal, it will easily come to mind, that this infinite, instantaneous
speed of information is constant for any observer, and that it does not
depend on the speed or direction of the source, nor on that of the
receiver (which is moreover considered, for him, fixed in his frame of
reference).
Once this is accepted (see the pdf of Dr. Hachel, blessed be he and
accepted in the Holy Lands of Aôôôllah, peace be upon him) and accepted
that the escape velocity of the wave is c/2 for any observer who emits, it
comes that in synchronization M, M', M"", the speed of the TRANSVERSELY
observed wave, that is to say neutral, will always be the same, and the
average of the two other speeds.
We fall back, having explained it, on the constancy of the observable
speed (transverse, neutral) of light.
This is what I explain in my pdf, on the question of the relativity of
chronotropy after having discussed anisochrony (the primum movens). The
moment is relative, chronotropy is relative too. It is a double
relativity.
We will see that it is the same thing, with lengths and distances. One
last word: it seems that physicists know perfectly well the notion of
contraction of lengths and dilation of durations. What is very strange is
that they have never been able to take the next step, and apply this also
to DISTANCES and INSTANTS.
Or if they do, they do it badly.
R.H.