An immortal fumble by Marcel Luttgens (26-Dec-2006)
The imbecile strikes again!
I said: "Megastupid imbecile, consider the point of collision: Relative to that point, car1 moves at v1 and car2 moves at -v2, hence the total kinetic *at that point* is 1/2 m1 v2^2 + 1/2 m2 v2^2, which is wholly converted to a heat quantity Q. With your relativity, you get different values Q1 and Q2 when car1 or car2 consider themselves at rest. As Q is the only valid physical result, your relativity theory is false. You replied: "And relative to *that point*, both molten together wrecks keep moving depending on m1, m2, v1 and v2 with consant velocity w.r.t. their original centre of mass, in which frame the experimenter can use the *definition* of heat to measure it with his calorimeters. Never heard of the conservation of momentum, Marcel? Do you think that when a fly hits a train head on, both glue together and stop dead *at that point*? What do want to be, the train or the fly? Who's kinetic energy are you prepared to absorbe, the fly's or the train's?" Take m1 = m2 and v1 = -v2, and try to demonstrate that Q = Q1 or Q2! And you didn't comment on the following very simple case, that straightforwardly shows the falseness of SR. Perhaps should you try GR? "But you, like your pal Pensil2, are too SR brainwashed to realize it, so I will take a much simpler scenario: Tree1 and tree2, situated along a straight 1-lane road, are separated by a distance d. The clocks of tree1 and tree2 are mutually synchronized. At some time t read on those clocks, car1 pass tree1 at a constant velocity v1<>0 towards tree2, whereas car2 pass tree2 at a constant velocity v2<>0 towards tree1. I hope that you are able to calculate the distance from tree1 and the distance from tree2 of the collision point. As you have proven yourselves so dense, I give the solutions: v1d/(v1+v2) and v2d(v1+v2). But according to relativity, car1 or car2 can consider themselves at rest, the other car moving at v1+v2. Then, from the point of view of car1, the collision will take place at the spot of tree1, and according to car2, at the spot of tree2. Those solutions are obviously physically nonsensical. If SRists claim that they are valid, they can rightly be qualified as crackpots." Marcel Luttgens |
|
| Fumble Index | Original post & context: 1167058390.953922.9600@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com |
|
See also |
|