Re: Natural Philosophy - It's challenge to SR


What about the Money paradox!?

--
Ahmed Ouahi, Architect
Best Regards!


"Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1174670325.185323.25830@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Phil <toob-head...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

my own thoughts (which may be the same as yours) are that Einstein
obtained real insights into the laws of nature, but then tried to use
those laws to create an "overly relativistic" physics.

All these laws are the properties of the Lorentz transformation.
Larmor was the first to have derived this transformation. Poincare
was the first to have studied it. In doing so, he had already
identified these two properties before Einstein plagiarized it or
reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform. "Secret to [my] creativity
is to know how to hide [my] sources." Who said that?

The 1st postulate
states that the laws of nature are such that the results of experiments
(including accelerating experiments, although most SR fans don't realize
that) are unaffected by the experiment's initial absolute velocity.

No, this is not true. It should read "[...] the experiment's velocity
relative to any other experiments done." not just the initial absolute
velocity.

By
itself, however, that is useless; the 1st postulate MUST be used with "a
starting point," one or more other laws which can then be used to deduce
the remaining laws of nature.

The principle of relativity was discovered by Galileo. There is
nothing more fundamental than that if it is a valid principle.

The 2nd postulate MUST specifically state [...]

According to the Lorentz transform, the constant must be the speed of
light in vacuum. It must be observed to be the same by any
observers. It is a constant that no other speed can be possibly
observed to be higher.

Einstein's insights do make it possible to ignore an object's INITIAL
absolute velocity, although any subsequent changes in AV usually change
an experiment's results.

Again, there are no insights in plagiarism. There are no insights in
reverse-engineering,either. The Lorentz transform is not only about
the initial velocity. <shrug>

The problem, which I THINK [...]

In the twins-traveling paradox, if each twin observes the same speed
in each other's velocity, the principle of relativity holds. If one
twin ages more than the other, this would prove the principle of
relativity wrong. Einstein's hand-wave about acceleration affecting
the twin going through acceleration or deceleration is absolutely
crap. When the twins meet again, the principle of relativity is fit
only for a cartoon showcase. The Pink Panther, anone?



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: time dilation
    ... The principle is right, ... the laws of physics in place. ... The principle of relativity -- as Galileo ... clock and put it on the floor next to you. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... The principle is right, ... the laws of physics in place. ... The principle of relativity -- as Galileo ... clock and put it on the floor next to you. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: time dilation
    ... about the principle of equivalence. ... I thought you scientists said Galileo was wrong about relativity. ... the laws of physics in place. ... Sorry, that's one reference frame, not two. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • ABOUT THE GALILEI PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY
    ... THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY AND ITS UNREASONABLE ... according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to K. The ... All Gaussian coordinate systems are essentially equivalent for the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Einstein the joker
    ... > conflict with the principle of relativity set forth in Section 5. ... > to the embankment with the velocity c, then for this reason it would ... that goes to modern physics is just logical economy in action. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast