Prev: 3x10^10 cm/sec uniquely linked to the end of Finiteness #560 Correcting Math
Next: Falling Physical pendulum Q - correction to 2nd reply
From: BURT on 2 Apr 2010 22:41
On Apr 2, 6:49 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 2, 3:15 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 29, 8:11 am, Tom Adams <tadams...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
>
> > Stop mystifying yourself.
>
> > Einstein’s 1905 paper was an attempt on plagiarism of Poincare’s
> > work.  In that paper, you can find tons of mistakes.  The center piece
> > is the Lorentz transform bastardized by Poincare from Larmor’s
> > transform.  In the Lorentz transform, due to mutual time dilation and
> > the principle of relativity, simultaneity becomes relative.  Several
> > events happening cannot be coherently put together in a precise
> > timeline agreed by all the observers.  Relative simultaneity is not
> > how the real world works.  Given the coherent results of any
> > interference patterns, the world must obey absolute simultaneity.
>
> > Larmor’s transform does not have this problem.  All observations must
> > reference back to the absolute frame of reference.  Thus, the
> > principle of relativity is not generally holding.  It does so only at
> > very low speeds.  This always is true for the Voigt transform which
> > influenced Larmor to build his transform.  Both Larmor’s transform and
> > the Voigt transform satisfy the null results of the MMX.
>
> > The Lorentz transform is a special case to Larmor’s transform.  In
> > general, the Lorentz transform does not possibly apply to the real
> > world.  For more information, consult the link below.
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/c540aaf2341...
>
> But civilization is advancing at FTL speed even with all these
> horrible mistakes Einstein made.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

My God. Science is about at year 400 really. Looking at Galileo and
Einstein.

This idea that we are far ahead is rediculous. Give science a million
years and then ask if it is superior. Civilization is at 10 thousand.

How long have we been building the fossil record?
Not very long.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Don Stockbauer on 3 Apr 2010 08:03
On Apr 2, 9:41 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 2, 6:49 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 2, 3:15 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 29, 8:11 am, Tom Adams <tadams...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > >http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
>
> > > Stop mystifying yourself.
>
> > > Einstein’s 1905 paper was an attempt on plagiarism of Poincare’s
> > > work.  In that paper, you can find tons of mistakes.  The center piece
> > > is the Lorentz transform bastardized by Poincare from Larmor’s
> > > transform.  In the Lorentz transform, due to mutual time dilation and
> > > the principle of relativity, simultaneity becomes relative.  Several
> > > events happening cannot be coherently put together in a precise
> > > timeline agreed by all the observers.  Relative simultaneity is not
> > > how the real world works.  Given the coherent results of any
> > > interference patterns, the world must obey absolute simultaneity.
>
> > > Larmor’s transform does not have this problem.  All observations must
> > > reference back to the absolute frame of reference.  Thus, the
> > > principle of relativity is not generally holding.  It does so only at
> > > very low speeds.  This always is true for the Voigt transform which
> > > influenced Larmor to build his transform.  Both Larmor’s transform and
> > > the Voigt transform satisfy the null results of the MMX.
>
> > > The Lorentz transform is a special case to Larmor’s transform.  In
> > > general, the Lorentz transform does not possibly apply to the real
> > > world.  For more information, consult the link below.
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/c540aaf2341....
>
> > But civilization is advancing at FTL speed even with all these
> > horrible mistakes Einstein made.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> My God. Science is about at year 400 really. Looking at Galileo and
> Einstein.
>
> This idea that we are far ahead is rediculous. Give science a million
> years and then ask if it is superior. Civilization is at 10 thousand.
>
> How long have we been building the fossil record?
> Not very long.

You've been so busy posting idiocies here you can't even see it,.
From: Tom Adams on 5 Apr 2010 21:19
On Apr 2, 4:56 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/2/10 3:15 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> > Einstein’s 1905 paper was an attempt on plagiarism of Poincare’s
> > work.  In that paper, you can find tons of mistakes.  The center piece
> > is the Lorentz transform bastardized by Poincare from Larmor’s
> > transform.  In the Lorentz transform, due to mutual time dilation and
> > the principle of relativity, simultaneity becomes relative.  Several
> > events happening cannot be coherently put together in a precise
> > timeline agreed by all the observers.  Relative simultaneity is not
> > how the real world works.  Given the coherent results of any
> > interference patterns, the world must obey absolute simultaneity.
>
>    In the 1800s Michael Faraday discovered, or I should say
>    formalized, electromagnetic induction. Given a coil of
>    wire and a bar magnet...
>
>               F = qE + qv x B
>
>    Holding the coil stationary and moving the bar magnet
>    produced an electric current in the coil. Similarly
>    holding the bar magnet stationary and moving the coil
>    also produced an electric current in the coil.
>
>    But in the language of electrodynamics of the day the two
>    cases were distinct independent phenomena that had
>    completely different explanations.
>
>    When Albert Einstein saw that, he said "Look guys, you've
>    just got to be kidding--Any yo-yo can see that these are
>    the same thing".
>
>    So it was this little experiment that was really the
>    start of relativity, not the Michelson-Morley
>    Experiment--not some exotic experiment to detect the
>    motion of the earth through the aether.
>
>    With this simple little phenomenon, that of course
>    everybody knew about, disturbed nobody else, but Albert
>    Einstein.

I like to think that he used the coil and magnet because he felt he
could not use his real inspirations like the fact it was absurd to
think about what you would see if you looked into a mirror while
you and the mirror were traveling at the speed of light. His thought
experiments always seemed to have priority. And with general
relativity it was perhaps all thought experiment perhaps.

>
>    This led him to write a paper that landed on the desks of
>    Annalen der Physik on 30 June, and would go on to
>    completely overhaul our understanding of space and time.
>    Some 30 pages long and containing no references,

No formal references, but at least one informal reference:

', together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of
the earth relatively to the ``light medium,"'


> his
>    fourth 1905 paper was titled "On the electrodynamics of
>    moving bodies" (Ann. Phys., Lpz 17 891-921).

From: Androcles on 5 Apr 2010 22:02

"Tom Adams" <tadamsmar(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a79fa784-5dbc-432a-94ca-808f4e76b36e(a)30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 2, 4:56 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/2/10 3:15 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
>
> > Einstein�s 1905 paper was an attempt on plagiarism of Poincare�s
> > work. In that paper, you can find tons of mistakes. The center piece
> > is the Lorentz transform bastardized by Poincare from Larmor�s
> > transform. In the Lorentz transform, due to mutual time dilation and
> > the principle of relativity, simultaneity becomes relative. Several
> > events happening cannot be coherently put together in a precise
> > timeline agreed by all the observers. Relative simultaneity is not
> > how the real world works. Given the coherent results of any
> > interference patterns, the world must obey absolute simultaneity.
>
> In the 1800s Michael Faraday discovered, or I should say
> formalized, electromagnetic induction. Given a coil of
> wire and a bar magnet...
>
> F = qE + qv x B
>
> Holding the coil stationary and moving the bar magnet
> produced an electric current in the coil. Similarly
> holding the bar magnet stationary and moving the coil
> also produced an electric current in the coil.
>
> But in the language of electrodynamics of the day the two
> cases were distinct independent phenomena that had
> completely different explanations.
>
> When Albert Einstein saw that, he said "Look guys, you've
> just got to be kidding--Any yo-yo can see that these are
> the same thing".
>
> So it was this little experiment that was really the
> start of relativity, not the Michelson-Morley
> Experiment--not some exotic experiment to detect the
> motion of the earth through the aether.
>
> With this simple little phenomenon, that of course
> everybody knew about, disturbed nobody else, but Albert
> Einstein.

I like to think that he used the coil and magnet because he felt he
could not use his real inspirations like the fact it was absurd to
think about what you would see if you looked into a mirror while
you and the mirror were traveling at the speed of light. His thought
experiments always seemed to have priority. And with general
relativity it was perhaps all thought experiment perhaps.

===============================================
Travelling at the speed of light relative to what, Tom?
I've travelled at 2/3 the speed of sound and noticed
nothing strange in the flight attendant's voice, why
should I notice anything strange if I travelled at 2/3
the speed of light? What would be absurd about it?
===============================================


>
> This led him to write a paper that landed on the desks of
> Annalen der Physik on 30 June, and would go on to
> completely overhaul our understanding of space and time.
> Some 30 pages long and containing no references,

No formal references, but at least one informal reference:

', together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of
the earth relatively to the ``light medium,"'

============================================
Galileo overhauled our understanding of relative motion,
Einstein's comment "The observable phenomenon here depends
only on the ... ahem...'relative motion' (excuse my cough)
of the conductor and the magnet." really hasn't overhauled
anything. Einstein denied relative motion applied to light, yet
the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth
relatively to the ``light medium," shows he understood
that the speed of light was relative to something.
His pathetically poor algebra would apply to sound (outside
the plane).

I like to think that Einstein was a dim bulb like Wormley rather
than a deliberate charlatan, but a preponderance of the evidence
points to him being guilty of fraud; what I (or you) like to think
isn't pertinent to the facts.


> his
> fourth 1905 paper was titled "On the electrodynamics of
> moving bodies" (Ann. Phys., Lpz 17 891-921).

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: 3x10^10 cm/sec uniquely linked to the end of Finiteness #560 Correcting Math
Next: Falling Physical pendulum Q - correction to 2nd reply