關於相對論動量亂賬的英文對話

戴榕菁

下麵是在academia.com和來自中國的讀者關於我的“The Faulty System of Relativistic Momentum and Energy【[1]】”一文的對話。

X. D. Dongfang
1 hr ago

The equation (1) in your article is derived from the integral form of the kinetic energy theorem in the sense of relativistic mechanics. Within the framework of relativistic mechanics, it has strict derivation. I seem to have reproduced such derivation in some articles. But relativity is based on the wrong assumption that the speed of light is constant.

Rongqing Dai
31 mins ago

You are wrong!.....Please try to give your derivation without redefining momentum p using (3).....Don't just talk by imagination......Try it using your hands!

了解我的讀者都知道我很反感在對我的文章做評論時不認真讀我的文章而憑想象自以為聰明地胡扯，所以我的語氣不太客氣。

下麵是該文相關部分的截圖：

 

相關鏈接：
相對論動量和能量的一筆亂賬

 

 

---

【[1]】 https://www.academia.edu/s/21bff1eea0?source=link

[慕容青草]

看來這是教育體製的問題。。。。那個地方出來的人好像都有一個硬撐到底的共性！下麵是他在我那裏死纏爛打之後我對他的喊話：

X. D. Dongfang:

Why are you so obsessed in bullshitting here? If you think that you can derive (1) using Lorentz transformation without redefining momentum, just do it and show others your result!

What's the point for you to bullshit so much here?

Do it! I give you the derivation and you claim you could do otherwise, just do it! What's the point to bullshit here???

[慕容青草]

這裏我要給那位X.D. Dongfang一個提示：當你意識到整個20世紀的物理學幾乎要被從根否定的時候，你不再為找到一兩個小毛病而興奮，而是要問為什麽會這樣？你更重視的是物理學實踐的方式，哲學，文化出了什麽問題。。。這就是為什麽在已經否認了狹義相對論整體的前提下來揭示“即便在承認狹義相對論的前提下，那個狹義相對論的動量都是有問題的”這一點的意義。。。。。。這可以幫助認識物理學界的方法和文化上出了什麽問題。。。。。