Disclaimer: approval for *.answers is based on form, not content.
    Opponents of the content should first actually find out what
    it is, then think, then request/submit-to arbitration by the
    appropriate neutral mathematics authorities. Flaming the hard-
    working, selfless, *.answers moderators evidences ignorance
    and despicable netiquette.
Archive-Name: physics-faq/criticism/galilean-invariance
Version: 0.04.03
Posting-frequency: 15 days

   Invariant Galilean Transformations (FAQ) On All Laws
     (c) Eleaticus/Oren C. Webster
        Thnktank@concentric.net


An obvious typo or two corrected.
The Brittanica section revised to less
'pussy-footing' and to more directly
anticipate the elementary measurement
theory and basic analytic geometry
that is applied to the transformation
concept.

---

Section Contents

• News Headers
• 1. Purpose
• 2. Table of Contents
• 3. The Principle of Relativity and Transformation
• 4. The Encyclopedia Brittanica Incompetency.
• 5. Transformations on Generalized Coordinate Laws
• 6. The data scale degradation absurdity.
• 7. The Crackpots' Version of the Transforms.
• 8. What does sci.math have to say about x0'=x0-vt?
• 9. But Doesn't x.c'=x.c?
• 10. But Isn't (x'-x.c')=(x-x.c) Actually Two Transformations?
• 11. But Doesn't (x'-x.c+vt) Prove The Transformation Time Dependent?
• 12. But Isn't (x'-x.c')=(x-x.c) a Tautology?
• 13. But Isn't (x'-x.c')=(x-x.c) Almost the Definition of a Linear Transform?
• 15. But The Transform Won't Work On Wave Equations?
• 16. But Maxwell's Equations Aren't Galilean Invariant?
• 17. First and Second Derivative differential equations.

Some parts © 2009 Advameg, Inc.