|
Quote:
|
|
This yahoo tried this same thread on my site. He made a comment about Lag not being real. I STOPPED HIM COLD WITH THIS ONE:
|
With the greatest of respect Brian I think you have a case of mistaken identity. I logged back in your site just now. Your system said that my previous logon was 01-28-2005. That's nearly 18 months ago. Your site tells me I made a total of 8 posts. Three were in a discussion called "Inside aft quadrant ??!!!". Four were in a discussion called "Golfing Machine Science.". One was in a discussion called "Ball and low point". The last words you wrote to me were "Yes, I do have those numbers....Will post them tommorrow."
You never did! Then you come here and boast about how you "STOPPED HIM COLD".
Wrong Brian. Not impressive at all.
As to the other ranting and mockery. That's your choice, and the natural consequences will follow. The discussion will deteriorate and die and anybody's chance of learning anything on the subject of frames of reference will die with it until one of your own explains it to you. An excellent opportunity to reconcile TGM theories with mainstream physics concepts will be missed.
If anybody is still reading, the laws of physics are different in non-inertial frames. The concepts, calculations and discussions become much more complicated because you have to apply so many corrections to deal with the motion of the frame itself. The results (after all the hard work) will be the same. Unfortunately the concepts are not immediately accessible to the man in the street. That does not mean they are wrong or invalid Mike.
Why is the difference important? As ThinkingPlus pointed out it is convenient for many purposes to use non-inertial frames of reference. For any physicist who wants to take the little yellow book at face value, the knowledge of the possibility of Mr Kelley using different frames of reference will eliminate a lot of head scratching.