> > > > > Because it would show that you at least have clue
> > > > > about physics.  All you and Androcles can do
> > > > > is rant and bluster.  Why not simply answer the
> > > > > question.  Do you really find it that hard?
> > > >
> > > > ROTFLOL.....It would take you another 20 years of studying physics before
> > > > you can catch up to my level of understanding physics.
> > > 
> > > Drat! Now I have coffee all over the front of my shirt!
> > > 
> > > Seto, I challenge you to a little match. You pick your opponent among
> > > the "SRians" here. There will be one problem or question from the end
> > > of each of the first five chapters of an introductory physics textbook.
> > > A third party will choose the textbook and the problems and post the
> > > problems. You will provide an answer to the problem and your opponent
> > > will provide an answer to the problem. You will submit your answers via
> > > email to the third party and when both answers are received by the
> > > third party, the third party will say "Post your answers". Then both
> > > you and your opponent will post the answers exactly as submitted to the
> > > third party.
> > > 
> > > Since you are twenty years ahead of your opponents in the understanding
> > > of physics, you should have no problems with 5 questions selected from
> > > the first 5 chapters of an introductory physics text.
> >
> > Hey PD get a clue. All the current text books are written based on the
> > assumption that the interpretations of SR are correct.
> 
> Really? What in the first five chapters of an introductory textbook is
> based on the assumption that the interpretations of SR are correct?
> Please be specific.

Hey PD....get another clue. I said all the current text books. I didn't
say an introductory text book. Since we were talking about SR I assume
that you are referring to any text book containing SR