Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
sci.physics.relativity only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

sci.physics.relativity Profile…
 Up
Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: glird
Date: Aug 23, 2008 22:54

In 1905 Einstein was a high school graduate waiting to get into a
higher level school. As such, he knew how to do algebra; but not how
to do calculus. When I began to study his paper, that was my level
too.
In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentz
equations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
.5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
Since I thought that was calculus, I wondered where the "1" came from
and what it means.
Years later I realized what no math expert since did: He wasn't
doing calculus there, he was doing algebra! I therefore changed his
"calculus" symbol, delta tau/delta t, into dtau/dt, whose value in the
LTE is dtau/dt = sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = q.
When someone on this group objected that this violated the rules of
differential calculus, I pointed out to him that Einstein began his
steps by saying, "In the first place it is clear that the equations
MUST BE LINEAR on account of blah blah". He then agreed that my
algebraic symbol, dtau/dt, could indeed be used.
And THAT, believe it or not, is why no expert physicist ever
understood E' s math nor where it went fatally wrong in his attempts ...
Show full article (7.63Kb)
130 Comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: Dirk Van de moortel
Date: Aug 23, 2008 23:07

glird@aol.com aol.com> wrote in message
3abd548d-4bea-46e3-9c73-99e25d42bf69@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com
> In 1905 Einstein was a high school graduate waiting to get into a
> higher level school.

In 1900 Einstein graduated with a physics degree at the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich.
In 1905 Einstein was a patent office clerk.
> As such, he knew how to do algebra; but not how
> to do calculus.

One cannot get a physics degree without being superfluent in
calculus.
> When I began to study his paper, that was my level too.

Even now, after half a life time of drooling and dabbling, you
haven't even got the faintest idea about elementary set theory.
Even a first class imbecile like Androcles can kick your bottom.

Dirk Vdm
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: Androcles
Date: Aug 24, 2008 00:20

aol.com> wrote in message
news:3abd548d-4bea-46e3-9c73-99e25d42bf69@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
In 1905 Einstein was a high school graduate waiting to get into a
higher level school.

======================
And FAILED. He was an idiot.
======================

As such, he knew how to do algebra; but not how
to do calculus. When I began to study his paper, that was my level
too.

=========================================
And you never got any further. Nor did Einstein.
=========================================

In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentz
equations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
.5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
========================================

Since I thought that was calculus, I wondered where the "1" came from
and what it means.
Show full article (1.55Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: glird
Date: Aug 24, 2008 18:39

On Aug 23, 6:20 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
> aol.com> wrote
>
<< In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentz
equations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
.5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
Since I thought that was calculus, I wondered where the "1" came from
and what it means.
Years later I realized what no math expert since did: He wasn't
doing calculus there, he was doing algebra! I therefore changed his
"calculus" symbol, delta tau/delta t, into dtau/dt, whose value in the
LTE is dtau/dt = sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = q. >>
> ========================================
>
> HAHAHA!
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PartialDerivative.html
> Years later Lebau still doesn't realize what every "math expert" >since did, delta tau...
Show full article (3.21Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: Dono
Date: Aug 24, 2008 19:00

On Aug 24, 9:39 am, gl...@aol.com wrote:
> On Aug 23, 6:20 pm, "Androcles" wrote:> aol.com> wrote
>
> << In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentzequations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
>
> .5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
> Since I thought that was calculus, I wondered where the "1" came from
> and what it means.
> Years later I realized what no math expert since did: He wasn't
> doing calculus there, he was doing algebra! I therefore changed his
> "calculus" symbol, delta tau/delta t, into dtau/dt, whose value in the
> LTE is dtau/dt = sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = q. >>
>

No, imbecile

The formula you are refering to is a Taylor expansion, it is taught in
11-th grade CALCULUS.
You, being the imbecile you are, never got to this point in high
school.
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: Androcles
Date: Aug 24, 2008 20:31

aol.com> wrote in message
news:388030d9-8428-454f-a09b-3fa2d9abfdb7@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 23, 6:20 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
>> aol.com> wrote
>>
> << In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentz
> equations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
> .5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
> Since I thought that was calculus, I wondered where the "1" came from
> and what it means.
> Years later I realized what no math expert since did: He wasn't
> doing calculus there, he was doing algebra! I therefore changed his
> "calculus" symbol, delta tau/delta t, into dtau/dt, whose value in the
> LTE is dtau/dt = sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = q. >>
>
>> ========================================
>>
>> HAHAHA!
>> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PartialDerivative.html
>> Years later Lebau still doesn't realize what every "math expert" ...
Show full article (2.22Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: glird
Date: Aug 25, 2008 00:31

On Aug 24, 2:31 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
>
>If x' = x-vt, (Cartesian graph at
> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/function.GIF
>under the words "Composition of functions")
>and xi = x'/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2), what is the value of u?
>
You are asking for the value of u in the equation
xi = x'/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2); which – other than the symbols in it,
is identical to xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2).
I am glad you asked; because it is right here that you
misunderstand Einstein's equations. The answer is: v = u, and may have
any numerical value at all.
The place where you (and many calculus "experts") go wrong
is in thinking that x' is moving at v relative to the K-frame
(x,y,z,t), thus is a member of a different frame of reference
than his "'stationary' system K."
I will try to explain it to you, in the same civil spirit you
seem to have recently adopted.
Co-ordinate system (cs) K (x,y,z, with the clock-time t) and ...
Show full article (5.04Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: Androcles
Date: Aug 25, 2008 00:56

aol.com> wrote in message
news:a18a1b10-5680-40ba-9c1a-615be7cd9e22@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 24, 2:31 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
>
>If x' = x-vt, (Cartesian graph at
> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/function.GIF
>under the words "Composition of functions")
>and xi = x'/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2), what is the value of u?
>
You are asking for the value of u in the equation
xi = x'/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2); which – other than the symbols in it,
is identical to xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-u^2/c^2).
============================================

Yes. I want to know how fast xi moves with respect to x'.

============================================

I am glad you asked; because it is right here that you
misunderstand Einstein's equations. The answer is: v = u, and may have
any numerical value at all.

==============================================
Show full article (1.59Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: glird
Date: Aug 25, 2008 05:37

On Aug 24, 6:56 pm, "Androcles" wrote:
aol.com>
<< The answer is: v = u, and may have
any numerical value at all.

==============================================

It is up to you to prove that.

============================================== >>

Next time, read my entire answer before interrupting.

<< The place where you (and many calculus "experts") go wrong
is in thinking that x' is moving at v relative to the K-frame
(x,y,z,t), thus is a member of a different frame of reference
than his "'stationary' system K."

==============================================

Not so, x' = x - vt.
x' remains at a constant distance -vt from x, like this:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/x'=x-vt.gif

I want to know how fast xi moves with respect to x', or, if it is some
distance from x', what equation relates the two.>>
Show full article (1.65Kb)
no comments
Re: Why relativists don't understand Einstein's 1905 mathematics.         


Author: John Kennaugh
Date: Aug 26, 2008 10:49

The TimeLord wrote:
>Am Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:54:04 -0700 schrieb glird@aol.com in
>3abd548d-4bea-46e3-9c73-99e25d42bf69@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com:
>
>> In 1905 Einstein was a high school graduate waiting to get into a higher
>> level school. As such, he knew how to do algebra; but not how to do
>> calculus. When I began to study his paper, that was my level too.
>> In his segment 3, as part of his "derivation" of the Lorentz
>> equations, he wrote: "Hence if x' be chosen infinitesimally small,
>> .5[1/(c-v)+1/(c+v)]delta tau/delta t" = etc.
>
>Source? Doesn't look like anything from Einstein...
Show full article (6.44Kb)
13 Comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9