Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: "kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx" <kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 05:58:56 -0700 (PDT)
On Jun 17, 12:04 pm, G <gehan.ameresek...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 17, 6:01 pm, "kens...@xxxxxxxxxx" <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 16, 9:23 am, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:58b41ffa-d497-4aa6-a6ef-aee7f0a1b2dc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jun 15, 8:33 pm, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in
messagenews:isjd351ova94klg0l8agkc9qcb958tsmjs@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:42:54 +1000, "Whoever" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
"G" <gehan.ameresek...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6f7c6359-d9fd-4349-b660-5986a524af39@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
By the way, Einstein made mistakes
http://discovermagazine.com/2008/sep/01-einstein.s-23-biggest-mistakes
Yes .. Einstein was human and his theories changed and evolved. Big
deal.
Einstein was a plagiarist and a hoaxer.
Doesn't really matter even if he was. What matters is the SR and GR
models
that he helped develop
His theory is just a disguised version of LET.
Its LET with the need for any mysterious physical shrinkage of objects
and
distnaces, and slowing of processes with by their movement in an
undetectable ether with properties that are inconsistent with known
substances. SR does not require that
Sigh....of course the ether unique and has unique properties that no
known substance has.
If it existed. Which by the nature of the properties it would have to have,
we cannot show. How convenient :)
You are wrong....SR does require the special properties of the ether.
It requires no ether, nor does it say there cannot be one.. SR works quite
happily with corpuscular/balistic theories, or wave/ether based theories. SR
postulates that the speed of light is the same for observations in all
inertial (non accelerating) frames. It really doesn't give a hoot about how
the light gets from point A to point B .. as long as the speed is the same
for everyone.
Then why does physicists refused to measure the one-way speed of light
directly??
For example: An SR observer claims that all the clocks in the universe
moving wrt him are running slow and all the rod moving wrt him are
contracted.....these are the exclusive properties of an observer at
rest in the ether frame.
Not at all. In SR it is a property of every inertial (non accelerating)
frame.
That's the point: Every SR observer claims that he is in a state of
absolute rest and that's why he claims the unique properties of the
absolute rest frame. BTW that's why SR is incomplete.....No object in
the universe is in a state of absolute rest.
Ken Seto
In ether theories, like LET, it is the property of a unique frame. But SR is
not LET. You're obviously confused about these two theories.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Maybe you have an experiment in mind to measure the one way speed of
light directly?
Yes.
1. Two touching and synchroneous clocks are moved very slowly in the
opposite directions at the same time with the same velocity and stop
these clocks at equal distance from the atarting point simultaneously.
These procedures can be accomplished by using opposite conveying
screws that are opertated by a common motor.
2. These two clocks will remain synchronized....according to SR and
LET.
3. Use these two spatially separated and synchronized clocks to
determine the one-way speed of light.
IRT predicts that the value for the one-way speed of light is distance
dependent. A description of IRT is available in the following link:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2008irt.dtg.pdf
Also visit my website for more papers on my theory:
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/index.htm
Ken Seto
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Whoever
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: G
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- References:
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Sue...
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Bruce Richmond
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: G
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Sue...
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: G
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Whoever
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Henry Wilson, DSc
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Whoever
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: Whoever
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: kenseto@xxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- From: G
- Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- Prev by Date: Re: Train gedanken pitfall
- Next by Date: Is "LC for the dumber" too hard?
- Previous by thread: Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- Next by thread: Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading