Re: Definition of A Field

From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 11/22/04 

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 15:47:11 GMT

"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in message
news:cnq57q$ont$3@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
> kenseto wrote:
> > "robert j. kolker" <nowhere@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> > news:307fniF2pgmbtU1@uni-berlin.de...
> >
> >>
> >>kenseto wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>So Einstein's gedankens are not speculations?
> >>
> >>Which led to -real- experiments which in fact supported the theory. A
> >>gedanken is just a test of concept, not a corroberation of theory.
> >
> >
> > But in his 1905 paper he had no experimental support.
>
> He had. His theory explained experimental observations which were done
> before (MMX etc.).

So does my thoery. In fact my theory explains a lot more than SR/GR and QM
combined. It explains:
1. the uncertainty principle.
2. the rotational curves of the galaxies.
3. the accelerated expansion of the universe.
4. the anomalous motion of Pioneer 10.
5. action at a distance.
6. what is electric charge.
7. a new theory of gravity.
8.unifying all the forces of nature.
etc.....

>Nevertheless, his theory was only widely accepted
> after *further* experimental support came in.

But never the right experiment that could falsify SR. For example:
1. do an OWLS experiment with two spatially separated and synchronized
clcoks.
2. Do the experiment in the following link:
http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Links/Papers/Seto.pdf

>
>
> > All he had was his gedankens
>
> Wrong.
 Not wrong.
>
> > and yet you think that's the greatest paper ever written.
>
> It was a great paper because it presented a new, unifying approach to
> several open problems of physics.

No it doesn't.
>
>
> > Is this
> > double standard?
> > BWT in my paper I have a very doable experiment that can falsify my
theory.
> > That's more than what Einstein has in his paper.
>
> Einstein made several theoretical predictions in his paper. By
> checking these predictions, it is possible to falsify SR.

The ether theory made the same predictions. In fact SR math is based on LET
math and LET math came before SR math.

Ken Seto

Quantcast