Re: Roberts' persusaive rhetoric.

From: Dirk Van de moortel (dirkvandemoortel_at_ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com)
Date: 10/17/04 

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 08:33:18 GMT

"mike3" <mike4ty4@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1d54b7e4.0410170011.1d589740@posting.google.com...
> "Androcles" <dummy@dummy.net> wrote in message news:<9fAbd.61468$ay5.17284@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>...
> > Roberts writes:
> >
> > "This is why most (if not all) physicists today believe in Special
> > Relativity - it is IMPOSSIBLE to construct an alternative description
> > without violating one of the postulates or disregarding a very large
> > body of experimental evidence. If you truly believe that Special
> > Relativity simply must be false (for whatever reason), go back and
> > review the four Postulates, and find a hole in them."
> >
> > This is why most (if not all) physicists today are failed mathematicians-
> > it is IMPOSSIBLE for special relativity to be anything other than false.
> > There is nothing wrong with the group postulates, but SR violates the
> > second.
> > " 2. Any transformation has an inverse, which is also a transformation."
> > So what is the inverse transformation to
> > x' = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) ?
> > A little algebra and
> > x' * sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) = x-vt
> > x = x' * sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) + vt.
> >
> > That is not an equation you'll ever see in SR.
> > However, the PoR must hold.
> >
>
>
> BWAHAHAHAHA! You have DISPROVEN your own argument! You showed the
> transformation has an inverse, therefore it does NOT violate the law
> you brought up. Because it has one, it is VALID under that law. It
> doesn't matter whether it appears in the theory or not. It is still
> VALID!

I just found out that the problem is *much* worse:
    http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/Persuasive.html
He can't even substitute a variable.

And the equation you see isn't part of the inverted transformation
at all. See also
    http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/SetSolve.html

Dirk Vdm

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Real benefits? Was Re: Ann Coulter, holocaust
    ... He hasn't "admitted to violating" anything. ... FISA is not Constitutional law. ... Third Geneva Convention; that Hamdan is entitled to that Convention's ... full protections until adjudged, under it, not to be a prisoner of war; ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: What constitutes a "High Crime or Misdemeanor"?
    ... >> blatantly violating a law that was specifically passed to protect the ... > marital sex is the highest crime imaginable, and nothing Bush does would ... > ever be considered a crime. ... George Washington Univ. law school professor and one of the top ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Kucinich Introduces Bush Impeachment Resolution (NDC)
    ... this country take immediate action to dethrone the gang of dictatorial ... thugs that have violated the rule of law we must have. ... legally, peacefully and properly, for violating the laws and ... dethroning these neocon thugs ASAP for me as well. ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Colorado OKs mandatory jail time for violating out-of-service orders
    ... Bill Owens recently signed a bill into law that increases ... the penalty for violating an out-of-service order. ... mandatory court appearance and mandatory license suspension. ... Hazardous materials haulers or drivers with endorsements to transport ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)
  • Re: Kucinich Introduces Bush Impeachment Resolution (NDC)
    ... this country take immediate action to dethrone the gang of dictatorial ... thugs that have violated the rule of law we must have. ... legally, peacefully and properly, for violating the laws and ... dethroning these neocon thugs ASAP for me as well. ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
Quantcast