Recent content by Sagittarius A-Star

Margaret Hamilton, computing pioneer who led software development for the Apollo program, dies at 90 Source: https://news.mit.edu/2026/margaret-hamilton-computing-pioneer-dies-1007

Here is a source: Source (letter pages 25 and 26, PDF pages 29 and 30): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Four_letters_from_Sir_Isaac_Newton_to_Doctor_Bentley._Containing_some_arguments_in_proof_of_a_deity_%28IA_b30368522%29.pdf

No. Both, plus calculating to solve problems, are needed for successful lerning.

I don't know, but I found something related: https://mathworld.wolfram.com/EuclideanQuantumFieldTheory.html

Yes. To be more precise: For the free-falling observer, a nearby body on the ground has locally a coordinate-acceleration relative to the falling (=inertial) frame of approximately ##9.81 \ m/s^2## (for ##v<<c##). An observer in a locally free falling elevator-cabin can throw a ball an notices...

Yes. It is the unphysical first case ##K=-1## in posting #2, which is an Euclidean rotation in the ##xt## plane. ##\begin{pmatrix} x'\\ t' \end{pmatrix} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-Kv^2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1 & -v\\ -Kv & 1 \end{pmatrix}## ##\begin{pmatrix} x'\\ t' \end{pmatrix} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1+v^2}}...

That's true, but I didn't claim that it is the same. With "4D-Euclidean metric" I referred only to the OP.

Given the assumptions in the paper "Nothing but Relativity", including group properties of a transformation (two boosts in one direction are equivalent to one boost of the same form), https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0302045 the Lorentz transformation as physically relevant follows only for one of...

You can. The following experiment proved, that the surface of Earth has a proper upwards acceleration of ##9.81 \ m/s^2)##. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound%E2%80%93Rebka_experiment Reason...

The proper acceleration is equal to the (momentary) coordinate-acceleration with reference to a momentarily co-moving inertial coordinate-system. Details: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/sr-textbooks-covering-accelerated-reference-frames-without-gr.1055627/post-6964768

That's because the related coordinate-acceleration of the ground is relative to a local free falling coordinate-system. Such an inertial coordinate-system could be for example at rest in a free-falling elevator-cabin.

Source: https://science.nasa.gov/blogs/roman/2026/09/15/nasa-activates-romans-primary-instrument-checks-out-coronagraph/

Both "scenarios" describe the same events: Meeting ##(C=0, A=0)## Meeting ##(C=2, B=3)##

Source: https://militarnyi.com/en/news/russia-soyuz-2-1b-rocket-rassvet-satellites/

Yes. But in the scenario is an asymmetry: 1 clock of observer B is compared to 2 clocks of observer A.