Re: An evolving notion of time
From: John C. Polasek (jpolasek_at_cfl.rr.com)
Date: 01/21/05
- Next message: Van: "Re: to androcles 2"
- Previous message: Harry: "Re: Wikipedia on mass"
- In reply to: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Next in thread: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Reply: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:42:46 -0500
On 21 Jan 2005 06:17:46 -0800, "reany@asu.edu" <reany@asu.edu> wrote:
>
>John C. Polasek wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 14:03:38 -0500, "AllYou!" <idaman@conversent.net>
>> wrote:
>[snip]
>
>
>> Einstein, in trying to explain the MM experiment, in league with his
>> mathematicians,
>
>What do mean by your phrase "in league with his mathematicians"?
>
>Einstein was NOT attempting to "explain" the MM experiment. He was
>trying to deconstruct Lorentz's explanation in terms of an absolute
>velocity space concept.
>
>
>> welded time onto our 3 dimensions but it doesn't
>> belong there. It just seems like it ought to. We have been saddled
>> with this for nearly 100 years.
>
>The Lorentz transformation is as responsible as anything for
>"welded time onto our 3 dimensions" of space.
>
>>
>> John Polasek
>> If you have something to say, write an equation.
>
>In physics, what else would one do? How do you make theoretical
>predictions to test experimentally without equations that relate
>measurable variables to measurements?
>
>> If you have nothing to say, write an essay
>Isn't your post an essay?
>
>Patrick
Einstein's 4D continuum seemss like a good idea, but as with most
advances, he started "in the middle", by finding an explanation for
the MM failure. And tacking time onto 3D seems like a good and logical
idea.
In my theory I start at the bottom to inquire: how can the vacuum do
such miracles? Iit turns out there's a giant space, Espace or quantum
vacuum 'behind' the vacuum that makes permittivity possible.
No, I dodged the essay trap by allusion to my equation-filled paper,
but here and there, with 7 chapters you haven't seen, things need a
bit of arm-waving.
(How they all pine for a new theory, but not just yet!)
John Polasek
If you have something to say, write an equation.
If you have nothing to say, write an essay
- Next message: Van: "Re: to androcles 2"
- Previous message: Harry: "Re: Wikipedia on mass"
- In reply to: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Next in thread: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Reply: reany_at_asu.edu: "Re: An evolving notion of time"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
