On 2024-04-04 18:46:53 +0000, Python said:

> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>>>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>
>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>>>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>
>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>
>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>
>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>> she says it very well.
>
> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel which almost
> exclusively spreads lies, hate speech and racism. Lengrand is doing the same :
> spreading lies (as you noticed), supporting bigotism, racism, white
> supremacism. Lengrand is a pathetic disgusting bigot, and an idiotic crank.

Until now these chacteristics of "Dr" Hachel had escaped my attention,
but you're right. I had thought that his main concern was to show that
he was the greatest scientist since Poincaré.
>
> BTW the government does not want to close it. Neither are people from the
> left who just asked for the state to stop allowing the channel to have
> free access to public broadcast network for free as they are basic
> decency
> requirements for channels to have such an access. Which makes, of course,
> perfect sense.

--
athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016

On 2024-04-04 20:07:49 +0000, Python said:

> Le 04/04/2024 à 21:58, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :

[ … ]

>>
>> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
>> and trying again to pretend he knows something.
>> Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
>> what a function is? Or are you still trying
>> to determine its properties applying a French
>> definition of a different word?
>
> What different word? How an idiot you are, Maciej...

Actually I was thinking that Wozzie might be able to help us in another
case. "Dr" Hachel was saying that he had given a lecture in Wrocław
about 30 years ago. Now my Polish is non-existent (apart from what I
can guess from studying Russian in the 1950s), and I suppose Google
Translate isn't up to the task of looking for conferences in Wrocław,
but maybe Wozzie could track it down.
>
> Are you more stupid than stubborn, Maciej, or the other way around?
>
> --
> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On 2024-04-04 19:50:57 +0000, Python said:

> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>>>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>
>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>
>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>>>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>
>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>
>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>
>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>> she says it very well.
>
> You may have noticed that M.D. Lengrand, aka "Hachel" is evading your question
> on what French TV channels say about Russia and Putin.

Of course. That's what he does.
>
> Evading when proven wrong or lying is an old habit of M.D. Lengrand.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

On 2024-04-04 21:25:59 +0000, Volney said:

> On 4/4/2024 3:50 PM, Python wrote:
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>
>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements about
>>>>> physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen on
>>>>> television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>
>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed doctorate?
>>>>> Until you do I shall continue regard it as something you got from a
>>>>> degree mill, or something you just invented. In other words a lie.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't get
>>>>> FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that. I
>>>>> regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and occasionally
>>>>> France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves these channels.)
>>>>> None of them has ever broadcast anything like the lies you pretended.
>>>>>
>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>
>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for her
>>>> television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr. Hachel
>>>> would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other than these
>>>> pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing (this
>>>> is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>
>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says, but
>>> she says it very well.
>>
>> You may have noticed that M.D. Lengrand, aka "Hachel" is evading your question
>> on what French TV channels say about Russia and Putin.
>
> And what he is a doctor of.

Medicine, I can believe, but nothing that would qualify him to
pronounce about relativity.
>
> Unfortunately, ru⚡︎⚡︎ia has very good propaganda so plenty of the
> not-so-bright believe all the awful things they say about Ukraine, even
> if absurd (such as a country with a Jewish prime minister and a Jewish
> secretary of state is run by Nazis). Putin himself is an old KGB agent.
>>
>> Evading when proven wrong or lying is an old habit of M.D. Lengrand.

--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

W dniu 05.04.2024 o 07:38, Python pisze:
> Le 05/04/2024 à 06:50, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 22:07, Python pisze:
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 21:58, Maciej Wozniak a écrit :
>>>> W dniu 04.04.2024 o 20:46, Python pisze:
>>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>>>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen
>>>>>>>> on television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed
>>>>>>>> doctorate? Until you do I shall continue regard it as something
>>>>>>>> you got from a degree mill, or something you just invented. In
>>>>>>>> other words a lie.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We
>>>>>>>> don't get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's
>>>>>>>> not that. I regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP,
>>>>>>>> and occasionally France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just
>>>>>>>> loves these channels.) None of them has ever broadcast anything
>>>>>>>> like the lies you pretended.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for
>>>>>>> her television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr.
>>>>>>> Hachel would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other
>>>>>>> than these pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing
>>>>>>> (this is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>>>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says,
>>>>>> but she says it very well.
>>>>>
>>>>> No surprise M.D. Lengrand (aka Hachel) loves C-News, a channel
>>>>> which almost
>>>>
>>>> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
>>>> and trying again to pretend he knows something.
>>>> Tell me, poor stinker, have you already learnt
>>>> what a function is? Or are you still trying
>>>> to determine its properties applying a French
>>>> definition of a different word?
>>>
>>> What different word?
>>
>> You've said yourself - French "fonction"
>> is defined differently than English "function".
>
> You are a fractal in miscomprehensions and lies Maciej...

Google doesn't keep the record now, but it's you
lying here. You've spent a lot of time and efforts -
to show that French "fonction" is defined differently
than English "function" and that your invoking
of French definition of "fonction" in English
discussion of "function" is an absurd. Well done.

W dniu 05.04.2024 o 07:38, Python pisze:

> "the sine function" and "la fonction sinus" are not the
> same thing, according to you, because the words are "different".

The mammal dolphin and the animal dolphin -
are they the same, poor stinker?
Are animal and mammal the same words, poor
stinker?

Le 05/04/2024 à 04:09, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> Richard Hachel wrote:
>>
>> Le 04/04/2024 à 16:48, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>>
>> The notion of tachyon is an abstract, absurd notion.
>> It's like asking a Pythagorean to draw a perfectly round square.
>
> Actually, tachyons fit perfectly into SR's equation:
>
> E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), when v > c the denominator is imaginary,
> so the energy is real if m is imaginary, too. The general energy
> equation is E^2 - p^2c^2 = m^2c^4, so if E^ > p^2c^, then m^2 is
> positive (normal matter), if E^2 - p^2c^2 = 0, then we have luxons
> (photons, gravitons) and if E^2 - p^2c^2 < 0 we have tachyons.
>
> Abstract? Perhaps, although neutrinos seem to have tachyonic
> properties. Absurd? Not so until proven wrong.

I have read your response carefully, and I notice that you do not agree
with my thoughts, but I am not offended by it as long as my correspondent
remains intelligent, honest and courageous in his actions.
As for the notion of tachyons, it is obviously an absurd notion, and I
have often and clearly explained why.
It's not that we can't observe observable speeds faster than light by
technological default, it's that it's physically absurd.
This is like trying to isolate dehydated water or draw a round square.
It's not that it's impossible, it's that it's absurd.
You pose the equation E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), it is both correct and
incorrect because it does not define v.
How do you write this equation?
If you write it E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - Vo^2/c^2) it is true.
But you will notice that I define here the observable, measurable speed of
things.
If I speak in real speed, I have to ask the same equation, but written
differently: E = mc^2.sqrt(1+Vr^2/c^2)
We then see that the energy of a body can only be positive, and that the
trick, which uses a speed Vo supposedly greater than c (which is absurd),
has no reason to be.
Then, we have the right not to believe me, and to invent tachyons and
round squares.
But it won't get very far, I think, even with big oars.
It's the intellectual masturbation of bored physicists.
To say that we cannot exceed Vo because it is physically and theoretically
absurd, and to write that Vo/c can have a value greater than 1, is
ridiculous.
I let the mathematicians and physicists play that if they want, but I
don't follow them.

R.H.

On 4/5/2024 3:46 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> On 2024-04-04 21:25:59 +0000, Volney said:
>
>> On 4/4/2024 3:50 PM, Python wrote:
>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 15:01, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>> On 2024-04-04 10:32:14 +0000, Richard Hachel said:
>>>>
>>>>> Le 04/04/2024 à 11:33, Athel Cornish-Bowden a écrit :
>>>>>> And yours? The other day you criticized me for referring to "Dr"
>>>>>> Hachel's most obvious lies rather than addressing his statements
>>>>>> about physics. If I know he's lying about he claims to have seen
>>>>>> on television, why should I believe what he says about physics?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two questions for "Dr" Hachel:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. When are you going to produce evidence of your claimed
>>>>>> doctorate? Until you do I shall continue regard it as something
>>>>>> you got from a degree mill, or something you just invented. In
>>>>>> other words a lie.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. Which television channels to you watch for your news? We don't
>>>>>> get FoxNews in France (or only with difficulty), so it's not that.
>>>>>> I regularly watch the news on TF1, BFM-TV, LCI, LCP, and
>>>>>> occasionally France 2. (Why so many? Because my wife just loves
>>>>>> these channels.) None of them has ever broadcast anything like the
>>>>>> lies you pretended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
>>>>>
>>>>> You are right, your wife (you will offer her my deep respect for
>>>>> her television curiosity) watches TF1, LCI and BFM-TV.
>>>>> But you should advise her and tell her, to help her, what Dr.
>>>>> Hachel would suggest to her: to also watch a few channels other
>>>>> than these pro-Bideniste and ultra-Macronist channels.
>>>>> There is a channel that I like, because it gets to the bottom of
>>>>> things, it is CNews, whose audiences in France are only growing
>>>>> (this is why the French government wants to close it).
>>>>
>>>> OK, I forgot CNews. Although rather right-wing it has some good
>>>> journalists, like Charlotte d'Ornelas. I don't agree wth all says,
>>>> but she says it very well.
>>>
>>> You may have noticed that M.D. Lengrand, aka "Hachel" is evading your
>>> question
>>> on what French TV channels say about Russia and Putin.
>>
>> And what he is a doctor of.
>
> Medicine, I can believe, but nothing that would qualify him to pronounce
> about relativity.

Python says "Dr." Hachel is really a medical Dr. Lengrand. "Dr." Hachel
himself won't say what he's a doctor of, much less admit or deny being
the same as this Dr. Lengrand. He ignores the question.

gharnagel wrote:

> “The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever
> that it is not utterly absurd.” -- Bertrand Russell
> So what may turn out to be absurd is those whose vociferously deny the
> existence of tachyons.

this usenet user can't see he is the one which is absurd lol.

𝗦𝗰𝗼𝘁𝘁_𝗥𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹_𝗯𝗲_𝗗𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗗_𝗮𝘀_𝗣𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻_𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝘀_𝗡𝗔𝗧𝗢'𝘀_𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆
https://bi%74%63%68%75te.com/video/UQthbCLEEsvW

Richard Hachel wrote:
>
> Le 05/04/2024 à 04:09, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> >
> > Richard Hachel wrote:
> > >
> > > The notion of tachyon is an abstract, absurd notion.
> > > It's like asking a Pythagorean to draw a perfectly round square.
> >
> > Actually, tachyons fit perfectly into SR's equation:
> >
> > E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), when v > c the denominator is imaginary,
> > so the energy is real if m is imaginary, too. The general energy
> > equation is E^2 - p^2c^2 = m^2c^4, so if E^ > p^2c^, then m^2 is
> > positive (normal matter), if E^2 - p^2c^2 = 0, then we have luxons
> > (photons, gravitons) and if E^2 - p^2c^2 < 0 we have tachyons.
> >
> > Abstract? Perhaps, although neutrinos seem to have tachyonic
> > properties. Absurd? Not so until proven wrong.
>
> I have read your response carefully, and I notice that you do not agree
> with my thoughts, but I am not offended by it as long as my correspondent
> remains intelligent, honest and courageous in his actions.
> As for the notion of tachyons, it is obviously an absurd notion, and I
> have often and clearly explained why.

I haven't heard a valid explanation.

> It's not that we can't observe observable speeds faster than light by
> technological default, it's that it's physically absurd.

Why is it "absurd"?

> This is like trying to isolate dehydated water or draw a round square.
> It's not that it's impossible, it's that it's absurd.

That's not even a valid comparison.

> You pose the equation E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), it is both correct and
> incorrect because it does not define v.

"v" conventionally (since the Galilean transform was introduced) means the
speed of an inertial frame with respect to the "reference" frame, and this
carries over into SR. That's why I use it, but it is somewhat incorrect for
tachyons because they may not have a reachable inertial frame. So I usually
write E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - u^2/c^2), then translate it to another inertial
frame moving at v wrst the reference frame. I used v in this case because
it is common to do so in relativity discussions.

> How do you write this equation?
> If you write it E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - Vo^2/c^2) it is true.
> But you will notice that I define here the observable, measurable speed of
> things.

Your method isn't the common way to write it. Those conversant with relativity
understand v implicitly, but they do not understand Vo because v is the
observable speed of an object. So you have invented your own term and conflated
it with v.

> If I speak in real speed, I have to ask the same equation, but written
> differently: E = mc^2.sqrt(1+Vr^2/c^2)

Which makes no sense to those who understand SR: They know it is wrong.

> We then see that the energy of a body can only be positive, and that the
> trick, which uses a speed Vo supposedly greater than c (which is absurd),
> has no reason to be.

I'm afraid your equation is incorrect. I can demonstrate a derivation that
E = mc^2/sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) with v as the velocity of a particle moving at
observable v wrst a reference inertial frame. It results in a minus sign,
not a plus sign.

> Then, we have the right not to believe me, and to invent tachyons and
> round squares.

For tachyons, E = mc^2/sqrt(u^2/c^2 - 1), where u > c and m is the absolute
value of the tachyon "invariant" mass. The minus sign derives from the
correct SR equation for energy.

> But it won't get very far, I think, even with big oars.
> It's the intellectual masturbation of bored physicists.

Perhaps.

> To say that we cannot exceed Vo because it is physically and theoretically
> absurd, and to write that Vo/c can have a value greater than 1, is
> ridiculous.

Vo is a bastard expression, I'm afraid.

> I let the mathematicians and physicists play that if they want, but I
> don't follow them.
>
> R.H.

I'm afraid that YOU are the one that is playing. You cannot show a derivation,
let alone a valid one, of your equation. I can.

Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> Vo is a bastard expression, I'm afraid.
>
>> I let the mathematicians and physicists play that if they want, but I
>> don't follow them.
>>
>> R.H.
>
> I'm afraid that YOU are the one that is playing. You cannot show a derivation,
> let alone a valid one, of your equation. I can.

:))

Please explain to me how, in Langevin's traveler, the proper time of
Stella's return journey is 9 years.

Explain to me why the apparent speed of the earth when it returns is
Vapp=4c.

It's very easy to explain.

It takes thirty seconds.

But explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron, why he did not give the
most beautiful notion of the theory of special relativity (better than
Einstein and Minkowski), and why he says that the distance traveled does
not matter. be a contraction of type distances D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) i.e.
7.2 ly.

Explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron who says it's impossible,
because x=Vapp.Tr and x=36aly and that the only way to understand RR is to
listen to what he says, everything he says, and exclusion of all the
bullshit of others.

We'll never get out of this if you don't make the effort to understand
what I'm saying, and if you persist in acting like a monkey when I answer
you and explain.

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:
>
> Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> >
> > Vo is a bastard expression, I'm afraid.
> >
> > > I let the mathematicians and physicists play that if they want, but I
> > > don't follow them.
> > >
> > > R.H.
> >
> > I'm afraid that YOU are the one that is playing. You cannot show a derivation,
> > let alone a valid one, of your equation. I can.
>
> :))
>
> Please explain to me how, in Langevin's traveler, the proper time of
> Stella's return journey is 9 years.
>
> Explain to me why the apparent speed of the earth when it returns is
> Vapp=4c.
>
> It's very easy to explain.
>
> It takes thirty seconds.
>
> But explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron, why he did not give the
> most beautiful notion of the theory of special relativity (better than
> Einstein and Minkowski), and why he says that the distance traveled does
> not matter. be a contraction of type distances D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) i.e.
> 7.2 ly.
>
> Explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron who says it's impossible,
> because x=Vapp.Tr and x=36aly and that the only way to understand RR is to
> listen to what he says, everything he says, and exclusion of all the
> bullshit of others.
>
> We'll never get out of this if you don't make the effort to understand
> what I'm saying, and if you persist in acting like a monkey when I answer
> you and explain.
>
> R.H.

Apparently, you can't refute what I said about energy (dynamics), so you're
trying to change the subject to kinematics. This is not a valid way to
have an honest discussion. I responded directly to your post but you are
equivocating. Continue a discussion that YOU started, or don't. I don't
care, but please be honest about it.

Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
> Richard Hachel wrote:

> Why is it "absurd"?

It's as absurd as believing that you can draw a student a round square.
As the student does not succeed, we blame the pencil, then we blame the
paper.
Then Paul B. Andersen intervenes who will accuse the professor.
We then change the pencil, the paper, the teacher, but the student still
does not know how to draw a round square.
We accuse the student, and we say that he is not cooperating.
This is what is happening with the speed of light speed, or body
propagation or physical laws.
We simply cannot.
Some people then set out to invent a tool, which they would call a magic
pencil, a very high-tech pencil,
and who would be able to draw round squares and
octagonal triangles.
But no, nothing will help, it is not a TECHNOLOGICAL problem, but a
logical problem.
You also cannot find an integer natural number between eight and nine,
even if you have a supercomputer.

It is simply as illogical, in OUR UNIVERSE, as to return before having
left, or to go faster than an instantaneous interaction.

We then enter into abstractions and absurdities which have, in science,
and in special relativity, no kind of interest.

R.H.

gharnagel wrote:

> Richard Hachel wrote:
>> Explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron who says it's impossible,
>> because x=Vapp.Tr and x=36aly and that the only way to understand RR is
>> to listen to what he says, everything he says, and exclusion of all the
>> bullshit of others.
>> We'll never get out of this if you don't make the effort to understand
>> what I'm saying, and if you persist in acting like a monkey when I
>> answer you and explain. R.H.
>
> Apparently, you can't refute what I said about energy (dynamics), so
> you're trying to change the subject to kinematics. This is not a valid
> way to have an honest discussion. I responded directly to your post but
> you are equivocating. Continue a discussion that YOU started, or don't.
> I don't care, but please be honest about it.

wow, this usenet user is taking "energy" to others, ignoring the same
energy, when talking about his own "faster than light" travel lol. This is
great, you must be from Glücksburg.

𝗨𝗡_𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝘀_𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗺_𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹’𝘀_𝗔𝗜_𝗯𝗼𝗺𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗼𝗳_𝗚𝗮𝘇𝗮
The technology should be utilized to benefit the world, not wage wars,
Antonio Guterres has said
https://www.%72%74.com/news/595510-un-israel-gaza-ai/

The purpose of AI is to avoid responsibility for crimes by blaming them on
AI. lol

The zionist Nazis are good at openly displaying their genocidal crimes. A
special prison should be built for their leadership

They are just creating this bull load on AI and rogue individuals to shield
themselves from warcrimes.

Zionist child killers AI is focused on bombing civilians, killing children,
attacking hospitals and killing foreign aid workers. Zionists have proven
to be the most cowardly subhuman savages in history.

Den 06.04.2024 03:49, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>
> Please explain to me how, in Langevin's traveler, the proper time of
> Stella's return journey is 9 years.

It is very easy to explain.

The proper time of Stella's return journey is what
The Special Theory of Relativity predicts it is.

https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByMetric.pdf
https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByDoppler.pdf

The Special Theory of Relativity is tested
by innumerable experiments and is falsified by none.

https://paulba.no/paper/index.html

The twin 'paradox' is tested here:
https://paulba.no/paper/Hafele.pdf

The twin that travelled around the Earth in the westward direction
aged ~330 ns more than the twin that travel around the Earth in
the eastward direction.

As predicted by SR (within precision of measurements).

>
> Explain to me why the apparent speed of the earth when it returns is
> Vapp=4c.

I suppose you mean what the speed of the Earth will appear to
be for the traveller on his return trip.

The only way the traveller can measure this speed is by observing
the Doppler shift of the sunlight reflected from the Earth.
(Balmer etc., you know)

>
> It's very easy to explain.

Indeed!
If the observed Doppler shift is D,
then the measured speed of the Earth is v = c⋅(D²−1)/(D²+1)

Which always is < c, and never is 4c.
And it not only 'apparent'.
The speed appear to be v because it is v.

>
> It takes thirty seconds.

About right.

>
> But explain to me why Doctor Hachel is a moron, why he did not give the
> most beautiful notion of the theory of special relativity (better than
> Einstein and Minkowski), and why he says that the distance traveled does
> not matter. be a contraction of type distances D'=D.sqrt(1-Vo²/c²) i.e.
> 7.2 ly.

I can't explain why you seem to think Doctor Hachel is a moron.

But it's very easy to explain why Doctor Richard Hachel's
'theory' is falsified:

It is experimentally proved that the speed of protons
in the Large Hadron Collider never exceed c.

Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.

Inevitable conclusion:
Richard Hachel's "theory" is falsified.

A non falsified theory is more beautiful than a falsified theory,
don't you agree?

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

Le 06/04/2024 à 14:34, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
> Den 06.04.2024 03:49, skrev Richard Hachel:

> Which always is < c, and never is 4c.

Bon, t'arrêtes tes conneries?

On a déjà Jean-Pierre Python qui fait le con sur les forums français,
si maintenant quelqu'un de la valeur de Paul B. Andersen fait le con sur
les forums anglo-saxons, on va vite avoir la rue Michel, comme disait
l'excellent Charles de Gaulle.

R.H.

Le 06/04/2024 à 14:34, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :

> A non falsified theory is more beautiful than a falsified theory,
> don't you agree?

That's what I said.

Mais c'est sur les falsifications qu'on ne s'entend plus.

R.H.

W dniu 06.04.2024 o 14:36, Paul B. Andersen pisze:
> Den 06.04.2024 03:49, skrev Richard Hachel:
>> Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>>
>> Please explain to me how, in Langevin's traveler, the proper time of
>> Stella's return journey is 9 years.
>
> It is very easy to explain.
>
> The proper time of Stella's return journey is what
> The Special Theory of Relativity predicts it is.

Of course, The Special Theory of Relativity
predicts two different, excluding each other
values for that. Happensd to inconsistent mumble
of an idiot declaring that common sense is
just a collection of prejudices.

>
> https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByMetric.pdf
> https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByDoppler.pdf
>
> The Special Theory of Relativity is tested
> by innumerable experiments and is falsified by none.

In the meantime in the real world, of course,
forbidden by your insane cult "improper" clocks
keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks
always did.

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

> Den 06.04.2024 03:49, skrev Richard Hachel:
>> Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>>
>> Please explain to me how, in Langevin's traveler, the proper time of
>> Stella's return journey is 9 years.
>
> It is very easy to explain.
>
> The proper time of Stella's return journey is what The Special Theory of
> Relativity predicts it is.
>
> https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByMetric.pdf
> https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByDoppler.pdf

you are a vassal state lol.

𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁_𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗸_–_𝗘𝗨_𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲’𝘀_𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿
The West should support Kiev, but also “think about how the conflict could
end,” Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer has said
https://www.%72%74.com/russia/595518-russia-ukraine-peace-austria/

While Minsk Agreement talks were happening, NATO killers were preparing to
kill Russians. Too late for talks. Russia has to stop NATO. Period.

EU's states leadership.., all corrupt corporate puppets.

These nato euro trash political careerists spew the stupidest copy-paste
talking points. Something contaminated their brain.

Was the Chancellor asleep for the Minsk Accords? Maybe he overslept for the
"must talk" they held in Istanbul?

Volney wrote:

> On 4/5/2024 3:46 AM, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
>> Medicine, I can believe, but nothing that would qualify him to
>> pronounce about relativity.
>
> Python says "Dr." Hachel is really a medical Dr. Lengrand. "Dr." Hachel
> himself won't say what he's a doctor of, much less admit or deny being
> the same as this Dr. Lengrand. He ignores the question.

yes and no, probably, but try focusing on this

𝗝𝗼𝗼𝘀_𝗨𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴_𝗖𝗘𝗥𝗡,_𝗕𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗱_𝗦𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗲_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝗕𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗛𝗼𝗹𝗲
𝗦𝘂𝗻_𝗘𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗽𝘀𝗲_𝘁𝗼_𝗨𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗿_𝗶𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿_𝗔𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗵𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘁_𝗠𝗼𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗮𝗰𝗵
https://bi%74%63%68%75te.com/video/wsNF1AIE0xGX

these 𝙠𝙝𝙖𝙯𝙖𝙧_𝙜𝙤𝙮𝙨 satanists of polakia, the worst on the face of the earth.

Den 06.04.2024 16:56, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 06/04/2024 à 14:34, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
>>
>> It is experimentally proved that the speed of protons
>> in the Large Hadron Collider never exceed c.
>>
>> Richard Hachel's "theory" predicts that the speed of protons
>> in the Large Hadron Collider is 6927⋅c.
>>
>> Inevitable conclusion:
>> Richard Hachel's "theory" is falsified.
>>
>> A non falsified theory is more beautiful than a falsified theory,
>> don't you agree?

>
> That's what I said.

And you know of course which is the less beautiful falsified theory.

BTW, you never addressed what you claimed was impossible
in my posting below.

03.04.2024 Paul.B.Andersen wrote:
> Den 02.04.2024 15:25, skrev Richard Hachel:
>> Le 02/04/2024 à 14:48, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
>>>
>>> Let's stay in the real world.
>>>
>>> The only objects moving at "relativistic speeds" we
>>> can visually observe, are astronomical objects, like
>>> the matter in the jets from some galaxies (from their
>>> central black hole).
>>>
>>> The only motion we can visually observe, is transverse motion.
>>>
>>> So if the jet is coming right at us, we will see the matter
>>> at exactly the same point at the centre of the galaxy, the apparent
speed of the matter is zero.
>>>
>>> But when it is approaching you at an angle, you can measure the
>>> angular velocity, and when the distance is known, you can calculate
>>> the apparent transverse velocity, which indeed may be higher than c.
>>
>> No. It's impossible.
>
> There are _many_ "superluminal" jets where the matter in
> the jet appear to have a speed faster than c.
>

Please explain why you wrote: "No. It's impossible."

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

Le 06/04/2024 à 14:34, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
>
>>
>> Explain to me why the apparent speed of the earth when it returns is
>> Vapp=4c.
>
> I suppose you mean what the speed of the Earth will appear to
> be for the traveller on his return trip.
>
> The only way the traveller can measure this speed is by observing
> the Doppler shift of the sunlight reflected from the Earth.
> (Balmer etc., you know)
>
>>

Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

When Stella has just finished her U-turn, we imagine that she has made a
large arc of a circle still at the same speed of 0.8c (tangential speed)
she then prepares to rush towards the earth for the return.
The speed being 0.8c, as on the outward journey, she sees the earth coming
back towards her with an apparent speed of 4c.

And this throughout his return (otherwise you will admit that it is
absurd).

No matter how you measure this speed (telescope, beeps, Doppler effects,
etc.), you will always have Vo=0.8c, Vr=4/3c and Vapp=4c.

What I would like you to understand is that all of this is immensely
coherent, when it is ME who explains it, and no one else, but that for
reasons which are not scientific, the “physicists” refuse to listen to
me.

I have been begging them for years to listen to me, and to affirm like me
"that the effects of physics are perfectly reciprocal by permutation of
frame of reference". Just as Terrence SEES the rocket three times longer,
Stella SEES the distance to be covered three times greater, and not 12 ly,
but 36 ly.

It's this enormous, masterful, brilliant slap given by Doctor Hachel that
physicists cannot understand. They therefore conclude that Doctor Hachel
is the moron.

They are incapable of understanding, and it is by braying like a donkey
that they have before their eyes one of the most beautiful understandings
of the theory of relativity ever given, and not this filthy bullshit of an
absolutely abstract and ridiculous Minkowski block.

R.H.

Den 09.04.2024 16:26, skrev Richard Hachel:
> Le 06/04/2024 à 14:34, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
>> Le 06/04/2024 à 02:45, hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) a écrit :
>>>
>>> Explain to me why the apparent speed of the earth when it returns is
>>> Vapp=4c.

>>
>> I suppose you mean what the speed of the Earth will appear to
>> be for the traveller on his return trip.
>>
>> The only way the traveller can measure this speed is by observing
>> the Doppler shift of the sunlight reflected from the Earth.
>> (Balmer etc., you know)
>>

>
> Yes, that's exactly what I mean.

>>
>> If the observed Doppler shift is D,
>> then the measured speed of the Earth is v = c⋅(D²−1)/(D²+1)
>>
>> Which always is < c, and never is 4c.

>
> When Stella has just finished her U-turn, we imagine that she has made a
> large arc of a circle still at the same speed of 0.8c (tangential speed)
> she then prepares to rush towards the earth for the return.
> The speed being 0.8c, as on the outward journey, she sees the earth
> coming back towards her with an apparent speed of 4c.

If the velocity v is a long the line of sight, then the angular
diameter of the Earth will increase proportionally with time,
but the Earth will appear to be stationary, so its apparent
speed is zero.

But if the Earth is approaching Stella at an angle ϕ from
the line of sight, she can measure the angular velocity,
and when the distance is known, she can calculate
the apparent transverse velocity, which indeed may be
higher than c.

Vapp = v⋅sin(ϕ)/(1 - (v/c)*cos(ϕ))

For example, if ϕ = π/4 and v = 0.8c, Vapp = 1.3c

If Vapp ≠ 0, Stella will never reach the Earth, obviously.
So this apparent speed is of no interest for the twin 'paradox',
even if it is interesting for 'superluminal jets'.

So what's your point?

>
> And this throughout his return (otherwise you will admit that it is
> absurd).
>
> No matter how you measure this speed (telescope, beeps, Doppler effects,
> etc.), you will always have Vo=0.8c Vr=4/3c and Vapp=4c.

Rumours say you are a Doctor of psychiatry.
If that's the case, what diagnosis would you give the 'me' person below?

>
> What I would like you to understand is that all of this is immensely
> coherent, when it is ME who explains it, and no one else, but that for
> reasons which are not scientific, the “physicists” refuse to listen to me.
>
> I have been begging them for years to listen to me, and to affirm like
> me "that the effects of physics are perfectly reciprocal by permutation
> of frame of reference". Just as Terrence SEES the rocket three times
> longer, Stella SEES the distance to be covered three times greater, and
> not 12 ly, but 36 ly.
>
> It's this enormous, masterful, brilliant slap given by Doctor Hachel
> that physicists cannot understand. They therefore conclude that Doctor
> Hachel is the moron.

Megalomania ?

>
> They are incapable of understanding, and it is by braying like a donkey
> that they have before their eyes one of the most beautiful
> understandings of the theory of relativity ever given, and not this
> filthy bullshit of an absolutely abstract and ridiculous Minkowski block.
> R.H.

Yawn.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

Le 09/04/2024 à 21:14, "Paul B. Andersen" a écrit :
> Den 09.04.2024 16:26, skrev Richard Hachel:

> For example, if ϕ = π/4 and v = 0.8c, Vapp = 1.3c
>
> If Vapp ≠ 0, Stella will never reach the Earth, obviously.
> So this apparent speed is of no interest for the twin 'paradox',
> even if it is interesting for 'superluminal jets'.
>
> So what's your point?

If ϕ = π/4 then if I call µ the angle that the direction of my aim
makes with the direction of the object to be studied, I have: µ=3π/4.

Then Vapp=Vo/(1+cosµ.Vo/c)=1.842c

When Vapp'=Vapp.cosϕ=1.3025c

and Vapp"(transversal apparence)=Vapp.sinϕ=1.3025c

On this, I agree with you.

The apparent transverse speed of a body moving at an angle µ equal to
3π/4 is greater than the apparent speed of this same body moving purely
transversely.
This is very very counterintuitive, but it is entirely accurate.

On this, you are absolutely right, and your calcul is correct.

R.H.

Richard Hachel wrote:

>> If Vapp ≠ 0, Stella will never reach the Earth, obviously.
>> So this apparent speed is of no interest for the twin 'paradox',
>> even if it is interesting for 'superluminal jets'. So what's your point?
>
> If ϕ = π/4 then if I call µ the angle that the direction of my aim
> makes with the direction of the object to be studied, I have: µ=3π/4.
> Then Vapp=Vo/(1+cosµ.Vo/c)=1.842c When Vapp'=Vapp.cosϕ=1.3025c

completely irrelevant. You only use cosines when you have a phase
distribution around a signal, otherwise you could use sinuses etc. Here's
what capitalist america is saying about france.

‘𝗡𝗼_𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲_𝗼𝗳_𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲’_𝗶𝗻_𝗚𝗮𝘇𝗮_–_𝗣𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗼𝗻_𝗰𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗳
Lloyd Austin said the US remains “committed” to funding Israel, denying
mounting accusations of genocide
https://www.%72%74.com/news/595664-gaza-genocide-israel-pentagon/

sure no evidence, otherwise america would be in prison judged and executed
according to the international law, Nuremberg etc.

but they escaped from the genocide of population with vaccines before, so a
single genocide is nothing for capitalist america.

Willful ignorance is not innocence. The exact opposit.

Austin has Ukrainian/Russian blood on his hands. He is even more
incompetent than the late Colin Powell. How much longer will the free world
continue to bear with such inhuman and heartless creatures?

Liar.

And slavery wasn't inhumane according to this heavily pigmented gentleman.

Disgusting monster. Thinks plausible deniability can save him. Enough is
enough. The criminal state of America does not get to decide what is and
what is not evidence in a murder investigation the US is thick with the
main culprit.

a fucking country of inbreed criminal. A territory shithole, not a country.

𝗙𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲_𝘀𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀_𝘀𝗮𝗻𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀_𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹
The measure would be meant to pressure West Jerusalem to allow more food
aid into Gaza
https://www.%72%74.com/news/595660-france-israel-sanctions-gaza/

Ironic, that is all I can say.

Sanctions, freeze assets, remove from SWIFT, no weapons sales,
international arrest warrants for genocide etc. The war would be over in a
week

How about just go over there and hang the khazar goys mother fukkers send
them back to fucking poland.

The entire West passed the most draconian sanctions on Russia and has sent
billions worth of weapons to neo-Nazis to kill Russians. However, with the
2,3 Million Palestinians being starved to death and bombed regularly, the
West could not even vote for a ceasefire, let alone enact sanctions against
Israel for violating UN resolutions for decades. France, or any Western
country, will not sanction the Apartheid regime as they are all under
Zionist control.