Re: A Forgotten Prediction of Einstein




Russell wrote:
> Sue... wrote:
> > Russell wrote:
> > > Sue... wrote:
>
> [I think it's ok to snip most of this]
>
> > > > Spend your two hours with the bell-hop problem.
> > >
> > > Heh, I know you are not serious, but let's pretend that you
> > > are, and make a deal. If I work out the bellhop problem for
> > > you, will you *finally* get off your duff and do a calculation
> > > for me? It's OK with me if you don't know how, just say so,
> > > and I'll walk you through it.
> > >
> > > > If you find it in your argurment then spend as long
> > > > as necessary in the study of various forms of Maxwelll's
> > > > equations 'till you learn how to make the argument
> > > > correctly.
> > >
> > > That's the whole problem with you, you study and study
> > > and never get around to doing a calculation to see if you
> > > actually understood what you studied. You might find
> > > the answer disturbing, far better not to go there at all,
> > > I guess....
> >
> > If your believe Einstein's 'Relativiy of Simulatiety' metaphysic
>
> Metaphysic? We're just talking coordinates here. You
> are *so* confused.
>
> > has any physical translation then you need to demonstate
> > with real field equations which will include moving media.
>
> What, you don't think the Jackson paper, which you tout
> around these parts, includes relativity of simultaneity? Of
> course you have worked this out yourself and are certain it
> does not.... Btw, have you sent that email to Jackson,
> informing him that his paper contradicts special relativity?
>
> >
> > Focus here:
> >
> > Time-independent Maxwell equations
> > The Biot-Savart law
> > Electrostatics and magnetostatics
> >
> > Time-dependent Maxwell's equations
> > Retarded potentials
> > Advanced potentials?
> > Retarded fields
> > Summary
> > http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/lectures.html
> > (You can tranlate Fitzpatrick to acsii maths yourself if
> > that is your preference )
>
> Did you email Fitzpatrick too? Most academics *love* getting
> email from interested laypersons willing to discuss their
> papers (or websites) intelligently, as I'm sure you will do.
>
> >
> > If you can't find the difference or can't find equations
> > for moving media then I'll try to find it for you.
>
> Right, you are good at finding. But no calculations. Make
> the things you find hairy enough, and you can say anything
> you like about them since nobody will ever find out what exact
> misinterpretation you are making of them to lead you to the
> nonsense you say. And if nobody can do that, well, you must
> be right. At least you can fool yourself that way, I suppose.
>
> This exchange has devolved and is now off topic AFAICS.
> So, if I don't get a chance to post again here, let me just say
> in closing, *what* missing dollar?


I will will state in closing you've shown nothing physically
objectionable with the statement that so intrigued you:

<<If Annie Oakly and Buffalo Bill are moving relatively on
equal horses and firing equal arms, a mid-point collision
of the bullets is proof they both know what "now' is. >>

If it doesn't fit in your universe then perhaps you are
describing a universe we have no access to.

Sue...

.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Triplet Paradox
    ... > Sue... ... >> Russell wrote: ... Einstein did not write the FAQ. ... << At this juncture the theory of relativity entered the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Electro-London Inertia
    ... > sue jahn wrote: ... In general relativity theory ... > proportion to the applied force of acceleration?] ... > upon a rest-based theory called relativity that cannot synchronize ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Polls: Is Special Relativity wrong? One person, one vote
    ... for the performance of all physical experiments" ... Sue loves this quote because it uses the phrase "totally equivalent". ... All inertial frames are totally equivalent ... relativity by asserting that all laws of physics take the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A Forgotten Prediction of Einstein
    ... >> Sue... ... informing him that his paper contradicts special relativity? ... And if nobody can do that, well, you must ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: relativity vs velocity addition
    ... |>> Russell wrote: ... | Special relativity shows that the the conflict with Maxwell's ... | equations and the principle of relativity is only *apparent*. ... The law of "Propagation of Light" is relative to the source. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)