Re: Einstein's Train Gedanken Re-visited

On Jun 18, 8:58 am, "kens...@xxxxxxxxxx" <kens...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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.

Guess again Ken.

According to LET a clock moved in the same direction as the frame is
moving in relation to the ether will run a bit slower during the move
and will lose time. A clock moved in the opposit direction will run
faster during the move and gain time.

In SR a slowly transported clock results in the same sync as light
signals. If we view from the tracks a clock on a train being moved
from A' to B' we will see that its setting does change. When at A'
the transported clock is in sync with the clock there, but not the one
at B'. When it arrives at B' it is in sync with the clock there, but
not the one at A'. When transported back to A' it will again be in
sync with the clock at A'.

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.

And why would that be?

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 -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: "length contraction" according to Lorentz and Poincare - An example
    ... > A correct ether such as IRT would avoid such misjudged assessment. ... It says that a moving observer will ... > see the ether frame clock not to be moving and the clock rate at the ether ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The differences between LET, SRT and IRT
    ... A LET observer is assumed to be at rest in the rest frame of the ... in the rest frame of the ether, but an arbitrary observer doesn't make ... This means that the rate of the LET observer's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading