Hi, I'm Kaziuk.
And bellow is my letter to professors of physics.
Dear Professor of Physics
Professors of physics say this:
Imagine that, from the point of view of observer A sitting on the upper deck of his own space station, the station of observer B passes by. But from the point of view of observer B, his own station is at rest. For him, it is observer A’s station that is moving.
www.einstein-online.info
But now Dear Professor of Physics imagine that the space stations don't pass each other but they just now collide with each other. In this situation, according to physics texbooks, from the point of view of observer A, station B hits station A, and from the point of view of observer B, station A hits station B.
And now, Dear Professor of Physics, imagine that station A is billions of times larger than station B and the relativistic speed is very small.
And now, Dear Professor of Physics, imagine that both stations are built from a flexible aluminum grid and smeared with super-strong glue – so at the moment of relativistic collision, the stations merged into one system.
Now on the system it's like that:
– from the point of view of observer A, after little station B hit huge station A, the system is at rest, as earlier was station A – because the kinetic energy of station B was so small that it was negligible,
– from the point of view of observer B, after huge station A hit little station B, the system MUST BE moving, as earlier was station A – because the resistance of station B was so small as to be negligible.
This absurd, which I have called the movement paradox, even my she-goat Beatrice cannot solve.
And if you, Dear Professor of Physics, don't solve the movement paradox within the framework of relativistic physics, i.e. you don't sensibly answer the question:
Since relativistic physics says that from the point of view of observer B, the system is at rest, then what happened to all the kinetic energy that from the point of view of observer B, huge station A had before it came into contact with little station B?
then it'll become clear to Beatrice and to anyone with at least as much brain as she-goat that all this relativistic physics is cosmic bullshit born from primitive human minds, and the universe must work completely differently.
I will add a few more sentences for those with at least as much brain as she-goat:
Imagine that somewhere above a meadow there is a butterfly suspended motionless. And this butterfly observes a flying cow flying towards it. After a moment the cow bumps into the butterfly which clings to the cow. And what? And in this situation, from Einstein's special theory of relativity results that from the point of view of the butterfly clinging to the cow, the cow miraculously stopped dead and isn't flying – because the butterfly and the cow constitute an inertial frame of reference – but the entire meadow flew in the opposite direction!!!
So even my she-goat knows that Einstein's special theory of relativity is monkey babble.
However, professors of physics take Einstein's special theory of relativity for granted.
"We now take Einstein's special theory of relativity for granted." – fragment of text which professors of physics posted on the webside of University of Pittsburgh.
How is that possible? Because Einstein was right when he said that human stupidity is infinite.
Here is my letter to the public.
Kaziuk von Märchendorf
mail: kaziukvonmaerchendorf@gmail.com
P.S. If you, Dear Professor of Physics, have something to say about my letter, do it on my Facebook page Einstein miał rację (Einstein was right).
(17/11/2024)