I Another interpretation of Lorentz transformations

[PeroK]

Let's change the subject. PeroK decided to consider the relations (1), (2), (3) wrong, but does not say what mistakes he sees. Do you still consider relationships (1), (2), (3) correct?

In general, if we are looking at a set of particles with uniform velocities $v_1, v_2 \dots$, then the position of each particle is given by $x_1 = v_1t, x_2 = v_2t, \dots$. It's not necessary to introduce a different time parameter, $t_1, t_2, \dots$ for each particle. Doing so suggests that you are not really understanding the basic concept of unform motion in a given reference frame.

That's a separate issue from the invariant speed misconception.

 

[ilasus]

Let's not, because it's key to where you are going wrong. Do you believe us now when we say that, in general, an object doing speed $u$ in one frame is not doing $u$ in another?

You refer to the consequence of the transformation of Galilee, ie to the mechanical composition of the velocities from different referentials, if the time is the same in the respective referentials. In this case, it is obvious that a mobile is moving at different speeds in different references. But I did not intend to talk about this case in this topic.

 

[PeroK]

You refer to the consequence of the transformation of Galilee, ie to the mechanical composition of the velocities from different referentials, if the time is the same in the respective referentials. In this case, it is obvious that a mobile is moving at different speeds in different references. But I did not intend to talk about this case in this topic.

This is absurd. You can't make every speed an invariant just by tinkering with time parameters. As before, it only works for a single invariant speed, $c$.

 

[bhobba]

Ilasus is very confused, as many have pointed out. Here is the correct math that does not even assume a constant speed of light:
http://www2.physics.umd.edu/~yakovenk/teaching/Lorentz.pdf

This thread is mercifully shut. Ilasus please study the deviation and start a new thread if you can fault it.

Thanks
Bill