Cranks on the endangered species list
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: The spinor nature of spacetime - Fictitious motion in a Minkowski spacetime
Next: QCD Meson Mass Paper -- Full Draft
From: RustyJames on 22 Dec 2008 16:41 On Dec 17, 9:46 am, "Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoor...(a)nospAm.hotmail.com> wrote: > bjones <ni...(a)4sure.com> > aka Brian D. Jones, "CAD designer with expertise in Special Relativity" > and former reviewer ofhttp://www.journaloftheoretics.com/info.htm > aka kk, > aka Kurt Kingston, > aka Dark Energy, > aka Forumodus of Halicarnassus, > aka TymBuk2, > aka Cadwgan Gedrych, > aka 2ndPostulateDude, > aka SRdude, > aka Edward Travis, > aka Ron Aikas, > aka Roy Royce, > aka John Reid, > aka Martin Miller > aka Wings of Truth > aka delta-T > wrote in message > 49480be9.26469...(a)us.Usenet-News.net > > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008, Tom Roberts wrote: > > >> bjones wrote: > >>> 1. Use synchronous clocks to measure light's one-way speed. > > >> First you need to define what you mean by "synchronous". > >> In particular, you must specify precisely how to set two > >> identical clocks separated by some distance so they are > >> "synchronous". > > >> As I have pointed out many times, this is not going to > >> be very useful, because the accuracy of atomic clocks > >> is insufficient to your purpose. > > > This is much better than the wimping-out of PD and the > > no-showing of Dr. Dirk. At least you do not ignore or > > deny the fact that (absolutely) synchronous clocks would > > overturn SR theory, and that was all that I was trying > > to get across. > > [snip usual Jones-rant] > > > > >>> 2. Perform the Michelson-Morley experiment with an unshrunken > >>> ruler. > > >> That experiment uses no ruler at all. > > > Objection overruled. Irrelevant. > > That was not an objection. It was a warning to illustrate > your utter ignorance. > > > > >>> 3. Perform the Kennedy-Thorndike experiment with an unslowed > >>> clock. > > >> That experiment uses no clock at all. > > > Objection overruled. Irrelevant. > > That was not an objection either. It was another warning to > illustrate how utterly ignorant you are. > > > > >>> 4. Try to apply Einstein's "synchronization" definition to more > >>> than one frame.[...] > > >> That definition cannot possibly be applied to clocks at rest in > >> different frames. > > > Einstein disagrees with you - > > "Also the definition of simultaneity can be given relative > > to the train in exactly the same way as with respect to the > > embankment." http://www.bartleby.com/173/9.html > > "Einstein disagrees with you ": > http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/EinsteinDisagr... > which, for a change, shows how utterly STUPID you are ;-) > > Closing entry of the year, I guess? > Congrats! > > Dirk Vdm- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The word at rest should be stricken from this forum can someone give me an instance where something is at truly at rest.
From: bjones on 22 Dec 2008 18:31 On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:41:49 -0800 (PST), RustyJames <extremesoundandlight(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >The word at rest should be stricken from this forum can someone give >me an instance where something is at truly at rest. 1. (Good) A clock that intrinsically runs faster than all others (or a person who ages faster than all others). 1. (Better) Something that moves neither toward or away from an approaching light ray. 2. (Best) Any inertial frame in which light's one-way speed is c (in all directions) per a pair of (absolutely) synchronous clocks.
From: PD on 22 Dec 2008 18:37 On Dec 22, 5:31 pm, bjones <ni...(a)4sure.com> wrote: > On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:41:49 -0800 (PST), RustyJames > > <extremesoundandli...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >The word at rest should be stricken from this forum can someone give > >me an instance where something is at truly at rest. > > 1. (Good) A clock that intrinsically runs faster than all others (or a > person who ages faster than all others). Can't use this. Seto has already claimed it. Let me know when you find one. > > 1. (Better) Something that moves neither toward or away from an > approaching light ray. Hmmm... As I sit here, I do not detect my motion toward or away from the light ray from the door. I'm not sure how I would determine whether I am moving toward or away from that light ray. Do you know? > > 2. (Best) Any inertial frame in which light's one-way speed is c > (in all directions) per a pair of (absolutely) synchronous clocks.. Let me know when you figure out how to absolutely synchronize clocks. PD
From: PD on 22 Dec 2008 18:41 On Dec 22, 3:21 pm, "Strich.9" <strich.9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 22, 3:46 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 22, 2:17 pm, "Strich.9" <strich.9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 22, 3:06 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 22, 1:54 pm, "Strich.9" <strich.9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Dec 22, 1:02 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 10:21 am, "Strich.9" <strich.9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 10:27 am, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 9:22 am, "Strich.9" <strich.9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 22, 9:23 am, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 21, 5:03 am, schoenfeld....(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom Roberts > > > > > > > > > > > > Roberts knows only what he has been exposed to. > > > > > > > > > > > > Black ops people know the current physics is a bunch of nonsense as > > > > > > > > > > > far as it being "the truth", but it does have limited commercial > > > > > > > > > > > applications. > > > > > > > > > > > I believe the "black ops" comment tells us everything we need to know > > > > > > > > > > about your mental state, thanks very much. > > > > > > > > > > Your beliefs are irrelevant. Unless you speak from the inside, your > > > > > > > > > comments are worthless. > > > > > > > > > "Unless you speak from the inside...." > > > > > > > > Hmmm... > > > > > > > > > Well, Strich9, it's nice to see that at least the sedatives are > > > > > > > > kicking in this morning for you.- > > > > > > > > Are you desperately trying to imply you have clairvoyance, crackpot > > > > > > > PD? > > > > > > > One doesn't need clairvoyance to detect incoherence, Strich9.- > > > > > > But you need coherence to see incoherence. Ever saw the incoherence > > > > > in relativity? No? As I said, you need some coherence first.. > > > > > Ah, then please elucidate what you think is incoherent about > > > > relativity and why. > > > > If you promise to take your medications, I'll help you out... > > > That's fine. I'll take every medication that is prescribed for me by > > my doctor. > > What do you think is incoherent about relativity and why? > > > PD- > > If you don't know, then you're hopeless. Change doctors. Your > current medications are not working... Oh, so you lied when you said "If you promise to take your medications, I'll help you out." Let's recap, shall we? You say there is something incoherent about relativity, but you can say what's incoherent about it. Is that because your thoughts about what is incoherent about relativity are too incoherent to put into words? The last baseball game I went to, there was a guy two rows back who had never been to a baseball game before and in fact didn't know much about the game, what the rules of play were, etc. But he sure liked to yell, "Kill the ref !" Even on perfectly fine plays, he'd just yell "Kill the ref !" because that's what he came to the game to do. Reminds me of you. PD
From: PD on 22 Dec 2008 18:46
On Dec 6, 3:04 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > It's worth noting that Spaceman has decided to snap out of it and has > turned his attention to other pointless pursuits. > NoEinstein has petered off to a few random posts on the weekend, no > longer able to muster the lung power to puff himself up anymore. > Strich9 and his several aliases seemed to have finally stopped > chattering. > Brian Jones gave a brief gasp and announced he was quitting. > ahahahanson is tired of hyenish cackling. > Louis Savain no longer has the strength to tell people to pack it for > months. > Gerald O'Barr has finally shut up. > Lester Zick has decided not to dress up anymore. > Andre Michaud is sniffing less and less, and can still be heard over > Marcel Luttgens. > And there are a few others that seem to have faded away. > > "Henri Wilson" and Ken Seto still persist in their attention-mongering > ways, and so their physical health must be fine even if their mental > health has deteriorated. > > Time to till the field and see what weeds pop up in the spring! > > PD Thank goodness Strich9 returned. Apparently, he wasn't proud enough of the bonfire he made of himself last time he was here, and he has decided to reprise his role as the Village Idiot in the sequel to (gasp) The Night of the Living Cranks. This time, he has decided that the production is a musical and so has added singing and dancing to the role. The economy is sad, but in the heart of it, there is always room for comedy. PD |