Ridiculous Mathematics of Relativity

Relativists argue that their theory of relativity is backed up with strong mathematics. Let’s have a glance at the weird maths that all the relativists are proud of, before we go on to ‘construct’ some equally ridiculous mathematics.

Relativistic Addition of velocities: Imagine two reference frames A and B. Also imagine that frame B (observer B) is moving away at velocity ‘v’ with respect to frame A (observer A). Now if an object in frame B moves with velocity u′ in the same direction, what would be the velocity (u) of the object with respect to an observer in frame A?

I know it sounds very complex because it is in the language of the relativists. And this is how they pose as highly intelligent and confuse and scare the readers. Let me put that in a much simpler way-

Imagine a train moving at velocity v with respect to an observer standing on the platform. Inside the train if a passenger is running with velocity u′ in the same direction as the train, what would be the velocity (u) of this passenger with respect to the observer standing on the platform?

Commonsense tells us that the velocity of the passenger must be equal to v+u′ with reference to the platform observer i.e.

u = v+ u′

But apparently that is not true according to our Goddess of Relativity. Here is the weird formula of adding velocities-

One may wonder from where the c2 comes. According to the relativists, ‘c’ is the speed of light (SOL) in vacuum (3×108 m/sec). The whole purpose of this weird formula is to ‘prove’ that SOL is same to every observer.

Now imagine a space ship moving towards a distant planet with velocity 0.5c (v) with reference to us. If a light beam leaves the spaceship with velocity ‘c’ (u′) towards same planet, common sense tells us that the light beam must be travelling at 1.5c with respect to us standing on the earth. But if we use the above relativistic velocity addition formula, we will be ‘surprised’ to realise that the velocity of the light beam remains as ‘c’ even with respect to us.

It is hardly mind blowing because the above relativistic formula was built upon the weird assumption of constant speed of light. So obviously we will get the same ‘c’ for speed of light even for observers moving at different velocities.

From the same stupid law of constant speed of light follow the time dilation and space contraction equations.

Time dilation: Relativity preaches that moving objects/clocks experience time dilation which is given by the formula

Formula

t’ is time run in the moving frame

t is time run in the resting frame

‘v’ is the velocity of the moving clock with respect to the resting clock and ‘c’ is the speed of light in vacuum

To know how the stupid folk have arrived at this stupid formula of time dilation, read Photon Clock and the Maya of Time Dilation.

Length contraction: the same theory predicts that moving objects experience length contraction which is given by

l' = l * sqrt(1 - (v²/c²))

where l’ is the length of an object measured by a moving observer and l is the length of the same object as measured by an observer at rest with the object.

Stupid assumptions can be supported by stupid Maths

Stupid model 1: We can assume- The sum of any two natural numbers equals 1.

To ‘prove’ the above, I can formulate weird maths. For example let us add the numbers ‘x’ and ‘y’ as per this weird model-

x+y/x+y=1

We know this formula of adding numbers is weird, and so is the addition of velocities in relativity.

Stupid model 2: We know from common sense and experience that 2×3=8 is not a correct mathematical statement.

But we can make it ‘true’ if we make some weird assumptions like 3=4 or 6=8.

But these assumptions are wrong, hence any model built upon them will also be wrong (even if some experiment appears to support the model). Same thing applies to the mathematics of Relativity which was built upon the irrational and weird assumption of constant speed of light.

Of course, at times a weird model may appear to have some strong observational support if one is not diligent. Apart from relativity, here are few such models.

Absurd Model 3: One may assume that the actual value of the numbers decrease as we ascend- i.e. 1>10>100>1000. A theory based upon this weird assumption obviously yields weird predictions that contradict our commonsense.

It might appear to ‘correctly’ explain few things/observations in our everyday life- For example this model might explain why older people despite ‘more’ age perish while younger people with fewer years survive better. It might also explain why 5mm grass weeds withstand winds better than 1000mm taller trees. But just because this model ‘correctly’ explained some observations in our Natural world, we can’t throw away our commonsense in favour of the absurd theory that is built upon an absurd assumption. (Similarly just because relativity explained Mercury’s perihelion shift, it can’t overthrow all our commonsense)

Absurd Model 4: ‘X’centric theory: One may assume that Mr X is in absolute rest in this universe and everything else in this universe moves with respect to Him. I am sure the spoilt mathematical brains of modern physicists can ‘weave’ an ugly but strong mathematical model to support this absurd belief. The observation that he doesn’t go to the coffee vendor to drink coffee, but the coffee itself comes to his table may be argued as proof the ‘X’centric theory. Also the fact that he doesn’t go out to meet people but people themselves come to his office can be argued as additional proof. If any body notices Mr X walking out of his office and tries to argue that as proof against the ‘X’centric theory, we can easily discard that as mere delusion of the unintelligent observer. We can argue “it was actually not Mr X who went to the market but it was the space-time which moved around Him and gave the impression that He moved”. But why should we discard what we have actually seen and imagine what we haven’t really observed? Well because that’s what our ‘X’centric theory (which has strong mathematics and also been proven beyond doubt by many observations) predicts and dictates. And we can argue “any kind of motion of Mr X is simply prohibited by the theory”. That is exactly how the stupid relativists argue and prove time dilation for the cosmic ray muons.

Absurd Model 5: Snail Relativity: One may propose that a snail is the fastest moving thing in this universe. One may state that it’s speed ‘S’ represents the speed limit of the universe. One may also add- the speed of the snail is constant to all observers irrespective of their motion. For those who demand for supportive maths, the same mathematics of relativity should suffice (one has to just substitute ‘S’ in place of ‘c’). And one just needs to make appropriate provisions for time dilation and space contraction similar to those of relativity.

If you have noticed a snail moving only 1mm in one second while a rocket moved 10000mm in the ‘same’ time, you must inference that the racket had experienced time dilation and space contraction. As the rocket travels at close to the speed of snail, its time dilates enormously. So, in the reference frame of the rocket, it only moved less than 1mm in one second. ”You are nobody to argue against what the rocket feels or experiences. After all, your reference frame is very different from that of the rocket and hence you can’t use your commonsense. Only mathematics can predict what happens in the rocket’s reference frame” the stupid theorist might argue just like how our relativists do.

But before we dispose our commonsense and logic and believe in the counterintuitive predictions of any new theory, two criteria must be satisfied

1) The new assumption upon which the new theory is based (e.g. constancy of speed of light) though appear weird at first, must have been arrived at by logical deduction. Or/and

2) It’s weird assumption must have been proven beyond doubt by experimental data and no better alternative explanations must exist for the observed data that appear to support the weird assumption.

Relativity fails in both the criteria.

Of course relativists have a superstitious belief in relativity and its weird predictions. These mesmerised brains believe that their superstitions have been proven beyond doubt by many experiments. But one doesn’t need a very high IQ to realise their distorted interpretation of the experiments that they swear as proof of their weird theory.

Go to Next Page

Go to Main Index

Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

Comments

  • pimikepi  On April 30, 2014 at 8:17 pm

    “Same thing applies to the mathematics of Relativity which was built upon the irrational and weird assumption of constant speed of light.”

    And upon countless experiments that confirmed this constant speed. Don’t ignore the evidence!

    Like

  • KAmara  On September 20, 2014 at 4:54 am

    No one thought that the speed of light is constant until it proved to be constant by measuring it. At least read the history of a topic you try to talk about. Prove that the speed of light is not constant by measuring it! You will get a Nobel prize for it.

    Like

    • drgsrinivas  On September 20, 2014 at 9:02 pm

      That is how a ‘wise man’ argues in support of his nude Emperor’s costume
      “My Emperor’s costume is marvellous not because it has golden glitters on it but because the magical weavers had given it a really marvellous finish on its inside”
      And each wise man who appreciates the Emperor’s costume will have a different imagination of the costume and different reasons for why the costume is marvellous!!!
      Basically I don’t even believe in what your pastors preach about velocity of sound. Why would I bother about their stupid measurements on speed of light.
      If it was for the Nobel prize, I would have come out with another weird theory or added a new weird dimension to your already existing weird theories. Why would I talk about logic and common sense?

      Like

    • Galacar  On September 24, 2014 at 5:52 pm

      To Kamara.

      According to me it wasn’t ‘proven’, but it was postulated by Einstein.
      And of course there is no real lightspeed limit at all!

      We are indeed talking about the emperor’s clothes here!

      “Meanwhile, at the Krim Observatory, N.A. Kosyrev and V.V. Nasonov used a piezo crystal grown under gravity free conditions to detect gravity waves emanating from the Andromeda nebula. Amazingly, they were able to detect gravity waves from the past, present and the future!. They also discovered that gravity waves travel at least 20 times the speed of light and have infinite phase velocity, thus invalidating Einsteinian relativistic theory.”

      Nuff said!

      Like

  • dcole  On October 9, 2014 at 7:22 pm

    If the snail is the fastest thing in the universe isn’t it impossible for the rocket to be moving so fast to begin with?

    Like

    • drgsrinivas  On October 9, 2014 at 10:11 pm

      Well, a photon is the fastest thing in the universe according to the religion of relativity, but how come the cosmic ray muon travelled 16000meters in 0.2sec? Same thing happens here. The secret is time dilation.

      The racket only travelled at 0.99mm/sec i.e. close to the speed of snail. It is the time dilation experienced by the rocket which gave us the delusion that it travelled so fast!

      Like

  • masind  On October 12, 2014 at 9:17 pm

    Your rocket analogy doesn’t work. You relate it to muons but that doesn’t work. With muons they don’t travel faster than the speed of light, they’re lifetime is simply extended in the Earth frame so they travel further. The important thing here is that the 0.2 second is the muon’s lifetime in it’s reference frame. It survives longer for an external observer. Importantly the internal clock (it’s lifetime) is used to measure the speed it travels with so time dilation will affect this measurement. We cannot measure it’s speed directly because we observe it at only one time.

    The rocket however can be timed and it’s distance travelled can be measured so time dilation doesn’t do anything. A stationary observer may observe the rocket contracted and a clock on board ticking slowly if it is relativistic but these don’t affect how an external observer measures it’s speed. There is no lifetime used to measure it’s speed, we can measure it’s speed directly.

    Additionally relativity is based on rational deduction. The speed of light is constant in Maxwell’s equations which are derived from classical empirical electrodynamics. Relativity is based on that an the assumption all inertial observers are equal. Relativity also passes experiments such as atomic clock experiments and relativistic beaming.

    Like

    • drgsrinivas  On October 13, 2014 at 10:22 pm

      I salute to your stupidity which made you to cling to the stupid religion of relativity.

      “We cannot measure muon’s speed directly because we observe it at only one time. The rocket however can be timed and it’s distance travelled can be measured so time dilation doesn’t do anything”.

      So you propose time dilation to hide your inability to measure the speed of a muon directly? Are you not ashamed of your stupidity? The main problem with your relativists is that they are not intelligent enough to stick to one frame of reference. Rather they keep wandering from one frame to another to save their stupid religion.

      OK agreed, 0.2microsec represents muon’s half life in its own frame. But for us to calculate the time dilation for muons, we will have to know its velocity with respect to us. Your pastors preach that muons’s velocity is 0.99c. But how did they come to know about this value? I gather that your pastors made some observations/measurements on the laboratory muons and found that they travel at 0.99c. Obviously to know that they will have to measure the distance travelled by the muons and the time period elapsed (both in our reference frame). For your pastors to say that muons travel at 0.99c, I presume they must have observed the laboratory muons travelling a distance of 600 meters in 0.2microsec (or something like that) in our reference frame.

      So if laboratory muons, whose velocity is 0.99c, travelled a distance of 600meters in 0.2microsec in our reference frame, then how come cosmic ray muons whose velocity is also 0.99c were able to travel a distance of 16000meters in 0.2microsec in our reference frame? Be careful. Don’t mess up with reference frames. Then you will realise how stupid is your religion. https://debunkingrelativity.com/muons-time-dilation/

      “Additionally relativity is based on rational deduction. The speed of light is constant in Maxwell’s equations”

      So you mean, it is actually Maxwell who is your God and not Einstein. But Maxwell only said that light waves travel at speed ‘c’ from his calculations. He didn’t preach that it is constant to every observer. Even the speed of sound waves can also be deduced mathematically. https://debunkingrelativity.com/maxwells-equations-and-speed-of-light/speed-of-a-wave/ But that doesn’t mean that the speed of sound is constant to all your stupid observers. That said speed of sound waves only applies to the reference frame of the medium. Similarly the speed of light waves calculated by Maxwell must refer to some medium. The fact that your stupid crowd couldn’t find evidence of Ether doesn’t mean that Ether doesn’t exist. That just proves the stupidity of your crowd. https://debunkingrelativity.com/ether-wind-and-ether-drag/

      “Relativity also passes experiments such as atomic clock experiments and relativistic beaming”

      That part of your stupid religion has been dealt with on several occasions on several pages.
      But I think your ignorance is too vast to get cleared by rational explanations. So I suggest you to cling to your stupid religion and keep chanting its stupid teachings in this birth.

      Like

  • Jerome  On October 17, 2014 at 7:47 pm

    IMPORTANT: Before trying to debunk ANY of Dr Srinivasa Rao Gonuguntla’s assumptions and theories, go make sure you’ve got your THINKING caps on, because MOST of you commenting here are fools who dont or cant THINK for yourselves. Sorry, this may sound harsh, but it’s the truth whether you like it or not.
    For fuck sakes, the speed of light has been proven to be constant yes but only for a specific frame of reference you fools!
    What that means, is that if you are standing still, and switch on a flashlight, the light will travel away from you at the speed of light, which is c. BUT, if you travel at the speed of light yourself and you then switch on the flashlight, the light will move away from you ALSO at the speed of light which is c, BUT for an observer standing still, the light from your flashlight will be moving away from THEM at 2c, NOT c. Those of you who dont get this are the very reason why relativity theory is still so widely accepted as the fact. Bullshit. Dr Srinivasa Rao Gonuguntla seems to be a very intelligent man, he seems to be able to think and reason on levels that you dont often come across. 99% of people I meet can and will never be able to reason and think on this high level.
    Therefore, before you tell him how wrong he is, first try ARGUE your thinking against his. STOP copying what you BELIEVE is already proven as fact. START thinking for yourselves please! Einstein was probably brilliant, but he made some mistakes. He was human just like all of us!

    If you call yourselves intelligent, then maybe you should start taking Dr Srinivasa Rao Gonuguntla more seriously. I take his opinions and theories VERY seriously because he can THINK. 99% of people CANNOT think.

    Like

  • Galacar  On October 18, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    to Jerome

    Well put! and you are 100% right!
    People can’t think and that is because of their ‘education’.
    The ‘education’, lower or higher level or in universities, is not meant to
    allow people to think, it is meant to STOP people from thinking!
    No kidding and all this by design!
    The educational system screws you up! deliberatly!
    I do agree most people can’t think.
    But, on a positive note, once you can and have unlearned your programming,
    you can start thinking again, and going back to you being a genius again!
    Everyone is a genius, until the schooling program starts!
    All this being provable!

    Like

    • Dennis  On April 18, 2016 at 10:27 pm

      I couldn’t agree more. We are taught to parrot authority and revel in popularity under the guise of it being ‘progress’. I am still shedding my indoctrination and I sometimes find myself making appeals to authority without using my brain as it was intended. It can be daunting to try to learn new subjects and many of us choose the lazier path. However, learning new concepts or relearning ideas without the attached narratives is an enlightening path with many rewards and many pitfalls (getting others to recognize the illogical).

      Relativity is at the forefront of the illogical which asks us to shed all common sense and reason in lieu of the metaphysical. Once you accept this fundamental fiction as reality, there is no stopping the possibilities of the imagination and manipulation of observation. Just like one can create a digital game, whatever parameters you define within that gaming ‘world’, is what defines that relative reality. This is the only “relativity” going on. If you program the game to allow for ‘monkey flying out of one’s butt’ power, so it shall be. Relativists allow for any possibility and inquiry into dark energy, dark matter, black holes, big bangs and singularities showcases the farce that is being perpetrated. Nonsense breeds more nonsense.

      Like

  • Frederik Falk  On October 19, 2014 at 10:12 am

    IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS:

    let’s assume the lorentz factor to be 20.

    Muon perspective:
    The distance to the earth is not 16km but instead 800m due to length contraction.
    The half-life of a muon is 2 micro seconds. Thus around 75% of the muons arrive at the surface of the earth.

    Earh perspective:
    The muons lifetime is increased to 40 micro seconds, at 0.99c. Thus around 75% of the muons arrive at the surface of the earth.

    Mr. Srinivasa, it is possible to measure the speed of these muons, and it has been done several times – it is found to be 0.994-0.998c. It is done by measuring muons travelling through two scintillators and measuring the elapsed time between the two measurements.

    You write:

    “So if laboratory muons, whose velocity is 0.99c, travelled a distance of 600meters in 0.2microsec in our reference frame, then how come cosmic ray muons whose velocity is also 0.99c were able to travel a distance of 16000meters in 0.2microsec in our reference frame?”

    Firstly, as stated above, you mix up reference frames. It is not 0.2 micro seconds in our frame of reference. Its half-life in our frame of reference depends upon its speed. Secondly, you state the same speed for muons travelling 600 meters and muons travelling 16000 meters. We have never observed this – ever.

    Like

    • drgsrinivas  On October 19, 2014 at 11:37 am

      “Secondly, you state the same speed for muons travelling 600 meters and muons travelling 16000 meters. We have never observed this – ever”

      It is beyond anybody’s capacity to rescue your insane mind from the clutches of your stupid religion. It is not what I state, but is what your own stupid religious predictions imply. If you are really capable of understanding what your own stupid religion preaches, why would you cling to your stupid religion?

      Dear believer, please pay attention. Don’t get blinded by your stupid religion.

      I didn’t say it is not possible to measure the speed of the muon. I have only been requesting your religious crowd to be critical when you propose time dilation/space contraction only for cosmic ray muons but not to the laboratory muons despite both ‘species’ travelling at the same speed. Let me make you clear once again.

      How do we know the life span of a muon in the first place? I note that your pastors came to know about that from their observations on ‘laboratory’ muons. Obviously for us to know the life span of a muon, we have to note the reading in our clock (same as Earth’s clock!) when that muon gets created and also note the reading again when that muon decays. Then we take this interval as the life span of the muon. Let’s take that as 2microsec as you all swear. (I know it is actually the half life that your pastors talk about, but to keep things simple I am just taking the life span). Please note that we have taken the time in our clock i.e. in our reference frame which is same as the Earth’s frame.

      Then how do we measure the speed of a muon? From your own description- a muon is made to travel between two scintilators. So we note the distance between the two ‘scintilators’ and we note the time taken by the muon to cover that distance and then we get the speed of the muon using the formula distance/time. Let’s assume that the distance is 600meters and the time elapsed is 2microsecond. That gives the speed of the muon as 300,000,000meters/sec (About 0.99c). Again remember that all the measurements are done in our own reference frame i.e in earth’s frame.

      So according to your stupid pastors’ clock, a muon lives for 2microsec. But how come the muon’s life span suddenly becomes 20 microsec in earth’s frame? Is it not that your pastors’ perspective and Earth’s perspective are not one and the same? If the muons lived for 20microsec, then your pastors would have noted that when they were studying the laboratory muons. Your pastors swear that both laboratory muons and cosmic muons travel at the same speed i.e. 0.99c. So isn’t it stupid to propose time dilation only for cosmic muons? The Earth is just a mute spectator to your pastors’ observations and is only providing a ‘stationary’ platform for your pastors as they studied the muon’s life span and speed. It implies that your pastors’ frame and Earth’s frame are one and the same. (This Earth must have committed some serious crime in its previous birth and hence the supreme God is punishing the Earth now by allowing your stupid pastors stand on it and say all that stupid stuff in the name of Earth’s perspective!)

      In the case of cosmic ray muons, the only thing that your pastors have seen is that cosmic muons travel 16000meters in their lifespan. That’s all they know. Your pastors haven’t directly measured the speed and life time of the cosmic muons. By religiously extrapolating their observations from the laboratory muons, they are adamant that cosmic muons also live for 2microsec and travel at 0.99c.

      Now let’s move to your space contraction delusion. According to your pastors, cosmic ray muons travel a distance of 16000meters in their lifespan to reach the Earth. Now, remember that when your stupid crowd measured the speed of laboratory muons, you have measured the distance travelled by the muons from your own frame. Your stupid crowd didn’t take the measurements from the muon’s perspective (which is obviously an impossible feat for any sane mind!). Then why do you resort to muon’s frame when talking about the cosmic muons.

      If you swear that muons live for 2microseconds only, then you must divide the distance travelled by the muon (as you yourself have observed) by 2 microsec to get the speed of the muons in your perspective (i.e. 16000/0.000002). But that would far exceed the limit of your divine speed ‘c’ set by your stupid religion. But that is your stupid religion’s problem. You can’t take the distance from the muon’s perspective (which anyhow we can’t really measure) and then time from your perspective to satisfy your stupid religion.

      And again, even if we were to believe in your space contraction delusion proposed by your stupid religion, how come that weird thing occurs only for cosmic ray muon and not for the laboratory muon if both travel at the same speed of 0.99c? Obviously if space contraction occurred for the laboratory muons, then your pastors would have noted them travel 160000meters in their lifespan of 2microsec same as the cosmic muons. That again goes against your stupid religion’s speed limit.

      I know it is a pretty long answer for a trivial thing but your religious crowd is so deeply indoctrinated by your stupid religion that you don’t understand even simple things but are rather prone to misunderstand, misinterpret and twist things in favour of your stupid religion(of course not consciously). And that makes your religious theories sound highly complicated to the novice and so the novice abandon exploring your religion but accept it solely looking at your pastors’ educational qualifications and social status.

      I hope that should make you realise the stupidity of your religion. If not, then go through the following page where even morons readily realise your religion’s stupidity. https://debunkingrelativity.com/relativity-mania/

      Like

  • Galacar  On October 19, 2014 at 9:40 pm

    Frederik Falk

    you wrote “”. We have never observed this – ever.”

    Now, who is ‘we”?

    Like

  • Tony  On January 26, 2015 at 2:51 am

    Great stuff! Hilarious commentary.. Work on the jokes and sarcasm, as that will make it all the more entertaining to read! It is clear, there is some magical sleight of hand going on here..

    Like

  • John Davis  On March 31, 2016 at 12:02 am

    I have enjoyed reading your thoughts very much. It’s fantastic to see classical mechanics and logic on display with such vigor. I have a couple ideas that have been bouncing around in my head and was hoping you might be able to clear up/

    Since we all enjoy trains so much… (Incidentally – a good reason for keeping the train around is frame of reference. Imagine all the textbook re-writes if students couldn’t relate)

    Imagine a 100% glass train moving at speed. At the caboose end we have a light beam emitter source pointing towards the front of the train. Now, on the ground we have a start line and finish line made of light detecting lasers which pierce the glass of the train and can measure just the velocity of the beam from a stationary perspective. Prior to crossing the laser start line our light beam emitter sends out a light beam so that it is able to be measured by our stationary lasers.

    Now if light acts classically (according to your analogy of the golf ball hit from top of the train vs the interior of the train) we should get the measurement of c+train ?

    If this is the case then its seems we have shown that c has not changed it’s velocity with respect to it’s own medium and that really we have measured the velocity of information. We have received the information of c faster than c from an outside frame and perhaps… it is the speed of information which is ever-present and needs no medium but an observer. ( Quantum Entanglement? )

    However if we don’t get c+train then we have to assume something else is happening. Perhaps the laser sensors experience Ether Drag the moment they pierce the glass train. Then you measure c exactly. I guess receivers on the opposing side of the train could check for beam shift.

    At any rate it would be interesting to prove whether something jumping from a closed system could ever use that velocity when exiting into the exterior system. I would guess not. (The golfer hitting the ball from inside and then opening a window quickly for the ball to exit.) I would imagine that the opposing ether blast would render it back to its true velocity.

    Thank You
    John Davis

    Like

    • drgsrinivas  On April 1, 2016 at 11:34 pm

      Thanks for your comments.
      With regard to your glass train and lasers, your second guess is correct. As the train moves, it drags the ether around it (and so the laser beams). And that ether drag is not an all or none phenomenon. Imagine a train moving in the medium of air. The ‘layer’ of air that is immediately adjacent to the train gets dragged faster than the air that is farther from the train. And the air that is within the compartment gets dragged as fast as the train self. Same is the same with any object moving in ether medium.

      The laser beams experience ether drag (and hence get deviated in the direction of the motion of train) from much before they pierce the glass train. Of course, the closer they get to the train, the greater the drag effect and the resultant deviation from the original path.

      When we drop a ball out of a moving train, it is true that an observer inside the train sees the ball move backwards (because of the wind effect). But an external stationary observer sees the ball move in the same direction as the train (the ball gets dragged in the direction of the train by the air currents i.e. drag effect). So the golf ball wouldn’t return to its original path but would continue to deviate towards the direction of train motion.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s