Re: "The Nature of Mass"
- From: "Strich.9" <strich.9992@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 08:23:02 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 19, 12:19 pm, "Wal" <w...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"The Nature of Mass"
About 40 years ago the writer came across the observation in a
Scientific American article that, in the equation E=M*C^2 there can only be
two independent variables...
With Einstein, one must remember to throw out all logic and simply
accept the theory on faith.
1) Twin paradox is logically untenable, but since it arises from
relativity, accept it as true.
2) Equations have only one dependent variable but e=mcc has all
variables dependent. Let us accept this as true.
3) LIGO has a negative result for relativity. The positive result
proves relativity correct. Let us wait for a positive one, even
though it may take literally forever.
4) GPB has a negative result for relativity. The positive result
proves relativity correct. Let us wait for a positive one, even
though it may take literally forever.
5) Time dilation and length contraction has never been observed. Let
us accept this as true since it follows from relativity.
6) The mechanism of time dilation and length contraction has never
been delineated. But let us accept that there must be a mechanism
since relativity has to be right.
7) There are many more minor things that have to be left alone for
relativity to be true. But it is such a great theory that let us
overlook all its weakness and remember its strength, which is what
again?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "The Nature of Mass"
- From: xxein
- Re: "The Nature of Mass"
- References:
- "The Nature of Mass"
- From: Wal
- "The Nature of Mass"
- Prev by Date: Re: Something 4 Everyone
- Next by Date: Re: The Physics Behind 'Contractions'.
- Previous by thread: Re: "The Nature of Mass"
- Next by thread: Re: "The Nature of Mass"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
