From: Francis Russell <francis@unchartedbackwaters.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 12:33:57 +0000 (+0000)
Subject: Remove unnecessary overlines on a few square roots.
X-Git-Url: https://git.unchartedbackwaters.co.uk/w/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=8cc6e9ef91c36133cbc00e725240abe4792c8907;p=francis%2Frelativity.git

Remove unnecessary overlines on a few square roots.
---

diff --git a/relat10.tex b/relat10.tex
index 43ba937..ad8b591 100644
--- a/relat10.tex
+++ b/relat10.tex
@@ -1165,8 +1165,8 @@ of the first equation of the Lorentz transformation the values of
 these two points at the time $t = 0$ can be shown to be
 
 \begin{eqnarray*} 
-x_{\mbox{(begining of rod)}} &=& 0 \overline{\sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}} \\
-x_{\mbox{(end of rod)}} &=& 1 \overline{\sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}
+x_{\mbox{(begining of rod)}} &=& 0 \sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}} \\
+x_{\mbox{(end of rod)}} &=& 1 \sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}
 \end{eqnarray*}
 ~
 
@@ -1621,7 +1621,7 @@ experiences a contraction in the direction of motion in consequence of
 that motion. the contracted length being proportional to the
 expression
 
-$$\overline{\sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}.$$
+$$\sqrt{I-\frac{v^2}{c^2}}.$$
 
 This, hypothesis, which is not justifiable by any electrodynamical
 facts, supplies us then with that particular law of motion which has