Leaderboard

To which the first retorts, "Easy for you to say, when your wife makes such good soup!"

The explanation is exactly what the maths says - pick a different path, and you’ll walk a different distance. There’s nothing else to it. No, I showed you that there’s no paradox that needs resolving. It seems to me that you’re wilfully refusing to “get” this. There’s no such thing as “relative to waves”, because light has no rest frame. The speed is always between emitter and receiver. Because it’s he who experiences acceleration locally in his frame. The equivalence principle tells us that uniform acceleration is locally equivalent to a uniform gravitational field; differently put, the accelerated twin sits at a different gravitational potential, which implies frequency shift.

Really? From his article that introduced the theory that later would be named 'Special Relativity': On the electrodynamics of moving bodies I think it is time to close the thread?

I don't know relativity oh my that's a laugh. I would never have have gotten my degrees without knowing let alone past the undergraduate stage. It's literally part of my job dealing with SR on a regular basis lmao. You might want to try again mate For me it's not a hobby or a curiosity but a career requirement

The musician finally gave up and began to erase all the lines of notes. His wife walked into the room and asked, "what is that smell?" "I'm decomposing," he replied.

He sought the advice of a mathematician who told him to work it out with a pencil.

Here's where studying evolution would really help. Eggs don't evolve. Evolution is the change in allele frequency within a population over time. So what happened was that a creature who was almost what we classify as a chicken laid an egg that became eggxactly what we classify as a chicken.

When we say that the speed of light is invariant with respect to all frames of reference, it is as if all frames of reference were the frame of the ether. This is also how Einstein saw it, he thought that there was an ether which was stationary for everyone. So the observer is always at rest and the object observed is in motion. The relativistic Doppler effect is therefore postulated as always produced by the observed object. LTs do not contain any indication of the speed relative to light because they are symmetrical and we cannot distinguish this speed. I gave the calculations. ----------------------------- I can't stop because you really don't understand relativity. You don't even know that the hypothesis of the invariance of the speed of light is a useless hypothesis for the theory, and that it only serves to get rid of the ether. ------------------------------- Time is not physical, so you don't age? Why would the wavelength decrease?

TBH, I'm indifferent to the issue, it doesn't even crack my top 20 of thing's to give a shit about; why would I waste my emotional energy, spending my daily chip allowance needs deeper problem's to warrant a reasonable return on my investments.