Recent content by jt128

can i change mine to jt? if jt is taken, then jt128?

can we stop this.. based on all what ive been explaining from since beginning to end with images included, it clear that i am talking about a straight line. why can you agree the obvious? Is it that hard? If two people are running to a finish line at constant speed, then of course they wont...

...which point do you agree with. 1. runners will not reach the same time 2. if finishline is scrolling, runners will not reach the same point.

thanks. for at least seeing what i am trying to say. we agree they wont cross the same time. and we also agree that if the finishing line is scrolling, they wont reach the same point. omg thanks!!! so all i am doing is replacing runners with light beams, the start point with a gun, and the end...

@weirdoguy i can ask it to you as well. Will both runners reach the finish line at the same time?

My runners analogy is the same as the laser analogy. Except 1. i replaced a gun with a starting line. 2. I replaced a target with a finish line 3. I replaced shot1 and shot2 with runners running at constant speed. So my simple question to you is this: will both runners reach the finish line at...

Than can you answer 1. will both runners reach the finish line at the same time? 2. with both runners reach the same spot of the finish line?

Ok. now i believe you just dont understand my question. Can this happen? --------------FinishLine x --R2----R1-----FinishLine x + 1 --------------FinishLinex + 2 --------------FinishLinex + 2 Runner 1 is in front of runner 2. Both are running at constant speed. Can both reach the finish line...

man... smh. i give up. the mirror experiment was proving some else. It has ONE light beam bouncing between 2 mirrors to prove time dilation. I am proving something else, with 2 beams, with distance between them checking to see if they hit the same spot. The very fact that there is DISTANCE...

I dont know how to respond to this... I thought that the direction of light is not influenced by the direction of its source. see what i mean? 1. there can be a disagreement about the angle of the path traversed by a light pulse 2. An observer in the rest frame of a vertically pointed source...

ok.. maybe i just dont understand. I am reading it and responding. But i do not understand what you are saying. You guys are saying terms like "relativistic aberration" and frames of reference, when i am not talking about that. I am instead talking about the literal actual recorded burn mark on...

relativistic aberration is about the role of the observer relative to the light source, the direction from which they receive light will appear shifted. Thats what i am not talking about that. I am talking about the actual burn mark on the target. Am i talking nonsense?

I dont know how to respond to this... I thought that the direction of light is not influenced by the direction of its source. is this the point of this forum? that i explain my erroneous understanding, and then try to understand what you guys are saying? but regarding how you responded, i...

Responses are coming in too quicky. And most are me explaining. ok... i'll simplify the question. If this doesnt work. Then i give up. Tell me on which step the logic breaks down. Analysis below is based on the image. Assume that the distance between the gun and the laser is far enough so...

I dont know how to respond to this... I thought that the direction of light is not influenced by the direction of its source. keep in mind, I not talking about the following: --> "When a light source is moving relative to an observer, the direction of the light appears altered due to the...