Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: "Mike" <eleatis@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 15 Nov 2006 06:49:37 -0800
karandash2000@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Mike is fun when he starts writing equations, he is like a football :
nice to kick around.
....But it moves.. (Galileo)..
Court audience:
Galileo is fun when he starts writing equations, he is like a football;
nice to kick around.
Hey stupid, if you define the distance required for the experiment
based on a ruler or rulers you assume a priori is S meters long you
have implicitely assume a speed for light and the resolution of the
experiment is affected by that. How long of a distance do you need to
have a resolution so that your bound on k in c+kv is not within
experimental error? You cannot determine that a priori based on the
speed of light you assume because the assumed value for the speed
affects the resolution.
The proper way to do it is determine the minimum time light must cover
a given distance so that your measurements are significant. Thus, you
must vary the distance until you determine that there is no more
variation in k. This is a difficult experiment nobody has done. The
reason that is difficult is that nobody knows when local variations end
and global variation begin. You may need 1 Km and you will not be able
to do the experiment. The truth of the way the universe works conceals
itslef so that stupid people like you always get the results they
expect.
Do you know the problem of induction?
Continue laughing and attacking for what you do not understand and are
so blind to see.
Mike
.
- Follow-Ups:
- "Mike" and the circular logic
- From: karandash2000
- "Mike" and the circular logic
- References:
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: karandash2000
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Paul B. Andersen
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Mike
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Tom Roberts
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: Dirk Van de moortel
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- From: karandash2000
- Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- Prev by Date: Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- Next by Date: Re: Simulataneity
- Previous by thread: Re: But Russell said SR is easy
- Next by thread: "Mike" and the circular logic
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading