|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics, sci.math
From: Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 00:14:48 -0800 (PST)
Local: Fri, Nov 6 2009 8:14 am
Subject: Re: Principle of Relativity
On Nov 5, 5:08 am, PD <thedraperfam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 1:36 am, Koobee Wublee wrote: Which one do you have? That is the one. <shrug> > > Try to pick up one of your textbooks and read up on relativity. > > <shrug> > Which one do you suggest that says the Lorentz transform is a law of > > So, all of a sudden, the self-claimed professor does not know the Try to read up in the textbooks you have. <shrug> > > symmetry in the Lorentz transform is all about any more. It is your > > problem. <shrgu> > What so-called symmetry are you referring to? > And what would symmetry Ditto. > have to do with the principle of relativity? > > Does you psychiatrist/warden know you have internet access? Name a textbook saying [v_12 + v_21 != 0] does not violate the principle of relativity. Even Professor Roberts had claimed [v_12 + v_21 = 0] is a necessary condition for the principle of relativity, but I seem not able to find the post because I am not willing to waste a bunch of time helping your ignorance. Get over with that. <shrug> You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||