Top Document: Invariant Galilean Transformations On All Laws Previous Document: 11. But Doesn't (x'x.c+vt) Prove The Transformation Time Dependent? Next Document: 13. But Isn't (x'x.c')=(xx.c) Almost the Definition of a Linear Transform? See reader questions & answers on this topic!  Help others by sharing your knowledge My dictionary relates 'tautology' to needless repetition. That's another form of the x.c' <> x.cvt idiocy. The repetition involved is the vt transformation term. Apply the vt term to the x term, and it is needless repetition to apply it anywhere again? The 'again' is to the x.c term. The x.c' = x.c crackpot idiocy. The repetition of the vt terms is required by the presence of two x values to be transformed. Be sure to note the next section. User Contributions:Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic:Top Document: Invariant Galilean Transformations On All Laws Previous Document: 11. But Doesn't (x'x.c+vt) Prove The Transformation Time Dependent? Next Document: 13. But Isn't (x'x.c')=(xx.c) Almost the Definition of a Linear Transform? Single Page [ Usenet FAQs  Web FAQs  Documents  RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: Thnktank@concentric.net (Eleaticus)
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
