Originally Posted By: Bill
Well, I figure you just need a little education.

You are obviously incapable of providing same.

Originally Posted By: Bill
The fact is that nothing changes in any of the scenarios you suggest, except your perception.

Arrant nonsense indicative of gross ignorance.

The scenario I suggested where one clock (A) is made to move to another clock's location (B) whereby clock A will be found to have ticked over at a slower rate than clock B was ratified by the Hafele Keating experiment.

In that experiment the rate of operation of clock A (the set of atomic clocks aboard the aircraft) physically changed whilst the clock was in motion compared to when it was at rest ergo your claim that nothing changes is egregious.

In particle acceleration experiments it is claimed that the particle's lifetime physically changes as does that of a muon accelerating toward the planet.

In the Wallops Island experiment the rates of operation of the clocks aboard the rocket physically changed during the flight ergo your claim that nothing changes is farcical.

Originally Posted By: Bill
Your demonstrations assumes that you are working in space. But in spacetime you have to include the time dimension. When you do that you are actually viewing the projection of the object which is moving partly in the time dimension. This means it is tilted with respect to your view and is thus shortened, as you view it.

Asinine and irrelevant nonsense! A blatantly deliberate attempt to obfuscate the discussion.

My depictions have not been in relation to views of an object that is moving through space but specifically to observations of beams of light!

I would normally be prepared to discuss the Terrell rotation concept however you have proven to be incapable of carrying out a meaningful conversation.

Originally Posted By: Bill
And if I really understood what relativity means I would write it up and get me a Nobel Prize.

It seems to me that on the basis of your lack of understanding of what relativity means where it refers to one clock moving relatively to another clock that you have extremely minimal understanding of what relativity means.

Einstein really understood what relativity means and wrote it up in a book called 'Relativity, the Special and General Theory' yet he received no Noble Prize for same but you obviously believe that you would be entitled to do so.

Originally Posted By: Bill
Our minds just aren't really built to correctly visualize the effects of relativity.

On the basis of your obvious inability to comprehend the concept of physical time dilation as presented in STR it seems that your mind may not be capable of correctly visualizing even a simple effect of relativity however this does not give you the right to assume that nobody is capable of exhibiting this ability.

Originally Posted By: Bill
And of course there are those who will jump on the "it's your fault for not agreeing with me" bandwagon.

Well at least I can exclude myself from that group as my criticisms have not been as to whether or not you have agreed with me but to the fact that you rudely refuse to respond to my questions and presentations other than via the application of diversionary, deceitful tactics.