Re: Sanity versus insanity: Poison for EinSteinIans
- From: glhansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Gregory L. Hansen)
- Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 15:54:33 +0000 (UTC)
In article <1123622488.30877903d2c5fd784617e2d33e34e5b4@teranews>,
Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>So, let's put some things down:
>
>How it REALLY is:
>
>Doppler:
> when moving towards the source of the light, you move through
> more periods (maxima and minima of the wave) in the same time.
>
>The Lorentz contraction null result experiment I did at:
> http://panteltje.com/panteltje/lorentz/experiment.html
> The reason it is zero is because there IS NO length contraction.
> It is only a visual illusion for an observer in a different
> reference frame, there is no REAL length change locally.
Nice attempt. It would have been nicer to see a more detailed error
analysis. But it looks like, to some extent, you've validated the
principle of relativity, one of the postulates that the special theory of
relativity is based on. Congratulations.
--
"Out of the way, you slime, a physicist is coming!"
.
- References:
- Sanity versus insanity: Poison for EinSteinIans
- From: Jan Panteltje
- Sanity versus insanity: Poison for EinSteinIans
- Prev by Date: Re: "The Scarcity of Life Bearing Planets"
- Next by Date: Re: Velocity of Electrons
- Previous by thread: Re: Sanity versus insanity: Poison for EinSteinIans
- Next by thread: Popular Handbook Microscope 1905 FA
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
