Re: thought experiment
From: Henri Wilson (H_at_..(Henri)
Date: 09/05/04
- Next message: Henri Wilson: "Re: The Muon Myth Exposed."
- Previous message: Henri Wilson: "Re: For Henri Wilson."
- In reply to: Androcles: "Re: thought experiment"
- Next in thread: Henri Wilson: "Re: thought experiment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:04:08 GMT
On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 14:20:17 GMT, "Androcles"
<androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Henri Wilson" <H@..> wrote in message
>news:o45fj09251mherb303pt064cluf49vqj18@4ax.com...
>| On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:56:10 GMT, "Androcles"
>| <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>|
>| >
>| >"Len Gaasenbeek" <gaasbeek@rideau.net> wrote in message
>| >news:10j78ct2vvk8e5a@corp.supernews.com...
>| >| To Endrocles,
>| >|
>|
>| >| To be a scientist you have to have the courage to discard the
>illogical,
>| >no
>| >| matter what religion or cult tells you to the contrary. Because the
>| >| scientific method doesn't allow for miracles.
>| >| A body can be black or white, but it can't be both black AND white all
>| >over,
>| >| at any given point in time.
>| >|
>| >| "Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence
>of
>| >| the improbable."
>| >| H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), US journalist.
>| >| Prejudices, 'Types of Men'
>| >|
>| >| Len.
>| >
>| >I happen to agree with your fundamental philosophy, but when you state
>| >velocity is independent of time when clearly everyone uses miles per
>hour,
>| >'hour' being a unit of time, you are totally off your rocker.
>| >
>| >Androcles
>| >
>|
>| Don't be hard on Len. He has some excellent ideas.
>
>That would be fine, H, but Len doesn't back them up when challenged.
>Instead he finds some one-line quote from a book he's read that
>he supposes will make his point for him, usually irrelevant. His entire
>campaign to promote his "selected papers" (who selected them, Len?)
>is founded on his wild imagination that someone, somewhere is going
>to believe his helical photon theory, fundamental to which is light
>speed being observer dependent. Len wants to agree with that and
>is proposing a physical cause for same; he totally ignores any
>evidence to the contrary. Having great ideas is one thing. Refusing
>to listen to the ideas of others, especially when backed by evidence,
>places Len in the same psychological category as the aetherialists and
>the relativists. He doesn't snip, but he doesn't respond either.
>
>
>|
>| Len is not completely wrong on that last one, A.
>|
>| Consider a spaceship that fires its engine at a constant rate for a
>period.
>| You can say that its velocity is changing as a function of time WRT an
>external
>| point, such as its base. But to the ship's occupants (who have no windows)
>,
>| the velocity is always zero, even though they know a force is acting on
>them.
>
>That is simply the principle of relativity.
>The rocket exhaust isn't feeling any force though, and it has a velocity
>relative
>to the ship that is dependent on time. You cannot even discuss velocity
>without
>time. Sure it can be constant, but it is meaningless without change of
>position as
>as function of time.
>Androcles.
Sure, A.
That's why I said Len is not ENTIRELY wrong.
>
Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
- Next message: Henri Wilson: "Re: The Muon Myth Exposed."
- Previous message: Henri Wilson: "Re: For Henri Wilson."
- In reply to: Androcles: "Re: thought experiment"
- Next in thread: Henri Wilson: "Re: thought experiment"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
