[guest39538]

You don't seem to have done any maths.
In any event, if you have, you seem to have made an error- because you get the wrong answer.

No, I have provided the evidence that the light clock thought experiment is at error and I have also provided math analysis of the  Hafele–Keating experiment and shown there is no time dilation it is a change in enthalpy .

I've killed time dilation  ...

[guest39538]

You don't seem to have done any maths.
In any event, if you have, you seem to have made an error- because you get the wrong answer.

Reply 31 does not agree with reply 36.
So one of them must be wrong.
It's obvious that you can't do maths.

I got there in the end Mr C ...it took me a while to get it correct . Post 31 I missed out a part . I also missed out the time function in post 36 .

H =

[Yahya A.Sharif]

Both observers experience the exact same amount of light seconds . 


ls.jpg (15.79 kB . 375x253 - viewed 6231 times)

r1=r2 no change in distance with respect to time no speed or speed equals zero.
Time dilation and length contraction are interchangeable they don't occur in case the speed is zero.None of them occur in case the object is at stationary.

[guest39538]

Both observers experience the exact same amount of light seconds . 


ls.jpg (15.79 kB . 375x253 - viewed 6231 times)

r1=r2 no change in distance with respect to time no speed or speed equals zero.
Time dilation and length contraction are interchangeable they don't occur in case the speed is zero.None of them occur in case the object is at stationary.

I don't quite understand what you said in your post , the light beam in a moving clock travels a greater angular distance than the light beam linearity in the stationary clock .  By time the moving  clock registers one tick , the stationary clock as measured 1 1/3rd ticks based on a 45° angular trajectory of the light in the moving clock .

t=(+y)+(-y)   stationary clock

t' = (+x)+(+y) incline angular on the moving clock

Both distances are equal and both observers ,  observe 1.3s  relative to the light beam .

The only way you get a dilation is if you make the error of not accounting for the (-y), 0.3s  in the stationary clock .

t=+y is an error , the correction is t = (+y)+(-y)

[Bored chemist]

I have provided the evidence that

No.
You have provided squiggles.

[guest39538]

I have provided the evidence that

No.
You have provided squiggles.

I quit , forum days over . cya .

[The Spoon]

I have provided the evidence that

No.
You have provided squiggles.

I quit , forum days over . cya .

Wish I had run a sweepstake on you claiming to quit once again... Your standard MO along with playing the victim, calling others trolls despite claiming to be 'the king of trolls' etc... Just tedious.

[Bored chemist]

I have provided the evidence that

No.
You have provided squiggles.

I quit , forum days over . cya .

They will still just be squiggles when you come back.

[guest39538]

I have provided the evidence that

No.
You have provided squiggles.

I quit , forum days over . cya .

They will still just be squiggles when you come back.

Well they will have to stay squiggles because I've now lost interest .  I'm going to find a new past time and find myself some conspiracy forums to go on , they seem rather fun and  I'm pretty sure I could contribute . Might start a flat moon trend or something similar.