Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science


"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1139783048.394322.265960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| Spaceman wrote:
| > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1139777673.296013.195540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | Just like Seto, Wilson, and spaceman, you simply don't know how to
| > | measure the length of a moving object or what requirements go into
that
| > | measurement.
| >
| > PD,
| > If you use such bad logic as
| > a length = a speed (such as the definition of the meter now)
|
| Nonsense, the definition of a meter is not a speed.

Bull***!
It is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in absolute
vacuum during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second.

(it is a "speed")
You are incorrect by 100%.

| Nope. You'll note that the confirmation of length contraction happened
| *before* the redefinition of the meter. The redefinition was permitted
| by the confirmation of SR.

No confirmation of length contraction occured before such.
(please cite such an experiment that physically proved such)
BTW: no experiment today has even done such with such speeds
yet!
LOL
HA HA!

The definition was changed to fit the bull*** in the long run.
Hence a rubber ruler.
The most stupid step science has ever taken so far.


.

Quantcast