Re: MMX and FORs Revisited
From: Peter Kinane (pkinane_at_iol.ie)
Date: 06/14/04
- Next message: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: The Theory of Einstein-Andersen-Moortel-Sal"
- Previous message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Not fair: Lorentz transformation makes Time an exception"
- In reply to: Peter Kinane: "Re: MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Next in thread: kenseto: "Re: MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 14 Jun 2004 10:41:51 -0700
pkinane@iol.ie (Peter Kinane) wrote in message news:<d8097fcc.0406131154.1ad56045@posting.google.com>...
> Perhaps this is an opportunity to connect here to an O'Barr post, in
> the context of my position that the speed of light is an expression of
> - effects through - its source- -causes.
>
> "Gerald L. O'Barr" <globarr@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:e9b03d3c.0406091933.1af3769f@posting.google.com...
>
> The fact that the
> > speed of light is independent of its source is
> > absolute proof that there is an ether, by one name or
> > another. The fact that light even moves, the fact
> > that it moves at a fixed rate, the fact that one
> > particle of light moves exactly the same as all other
> > particles of light, the fact that we see the rates of
> > clocks being affected by velocities, the fact that
> > lengths must therefore also change if the
> > measurements remain constant, all these facts demand
> > that there is an ether.
>
> It seems to me that the 'supportive' arguments he makes to the
> proposition that "the speed of light is independent of its source"
> actually support the opposite - that the speed (of light) is dependent
> on its source.
- or probably as he intends, that they infer the source.
'The source' of the speed of light:
The brilliant and beautiful philosophy system "Effectuationism" tells
us, as apparently does Quantum Mechanics, that, other than
inferentially, it is (the) effect which exists - not the source-
-cause(s).
So, were the ether to exist there would have to 'be' causal forces
doing the usual on and off thing to make it exist.
Peter Kinane
http://www.effectuationism.com/
- Next message: Paul B. Andersen: "Re: The Theory of Einstein-Andersen-Moortel-Sal"
- Previous message: Dirk Van de moortel: "Re: Not fair: Lorentz transformation makes Time an exception"
- In reply to: Peter Kinane: "Re: MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Next in thread: kenseto: "Re: MMX and FORs Revisited"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|