EXPERIMENTAL ARGUMENTS AGAINST SPECIAL RELATIVITY?
in [Physics]
|
From: NoEinstein on 9 Aug 2008 17:30 On Aug 8, 10:35 pm, Yuan...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Aug 6, 7:29 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 5, 9:37 pm, Yuan...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > Eric, how do you measure something without reference to something > > > else? > > > Acceleration is absolute - no reference required. > > I'm standing on the Earth, how do you measure my acceleration? > > Remember, you aren't allowed to reference anything to abnything else. > > > Counting fringe shifts is absolute - no reference required. > > Counting is not the same as measuring. > > A measurement necessitates reference to a standard. > > When you count 10 fringe shifts, what does that mean, if you don't > compare it with some standard count? > > Love, > > Jenny Dear Jenny: Way to go, woman! :-) NoEinstein
From: NoEinstein on 9 Aug 2008 17:32 On Aug 8, 11:41 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > Dear Yuancur: > > <Yuan...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:6d202070-208a-401b-8221-9aedb1461f1a(a)a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 6, 7:29 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 5, 9:37 pm, Yuan...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> > Eric, how do you measure something without reference > >> > to something else? > > >> Acceleration is absolute - no reference required. > > > I'm standing on the Earth, how do you measure my > > acceleration? > > Assume you have a body temperature of 98.6 degF. Measure the > apparent temperature very carefully, and the difference will be > indicative of your acceleration. > > > Remember, you aren't allowed to reference anything > > to abnything else. > > How about assuming something about your local physics? > > >> Counting fringe shifts is absolute - no reference > >> required. > > Counting is not the same as measuring. > > You are kidding, right? "microfine transitions of a caesium > atom" is not a measurement? The odometer of your car counts the > number of times your wheels rotate, but this is not a > measurement? > > > A measurement necessitates reference to a standard. > > Like a "unit"? > > > When you count 10 fringe shifts, what does that > > mean, if you don't compare it with some standard > > count? > > Not in this experiment, it is "is it greater than zero"? > > David A. Smith Dear David: Thanks for being right! NoEinstein
From: NoEinstein on 9 Aug 2008 17:46 On Aug 9, 12:13 am, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 5, 7:22 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:53 pm, Matthew Johnson <matthew_mem...(a)newsguy.org> wrote: > > > > In article <12eaa318-32bc-4942-9b17-249fa8f40...(a)f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, > > > NoEinstein says... > > > > >On Aug 1, 12:20=A0am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > > > > >Dear Sam: And in just one hour of analysis in my local library, I > > > >realized that M-M lacked a CONTROL. > > > > Then maybe you needed 1 1/2 hours. For what you 'realized', as SO often, is not > > > even true. > > > > [snip] > > > Dear Matthew: Anyone is welcomed to "shoot me down"if they can.. > > I wouldn't say anyone is trying to shoot you down. You can fly in the > wrong direction all you want. Some of us will simply be noting that > you are flying in the wrong direction, and then watching you continue > to do it. > > > But to do such, one must do more than "make a claim". They must > > explain the whys and the where-fors. > > I don't know why you think anyone owes it to you to convince you of > something you have no intention of entertaining. One might as well try > to teach arithmetic to a river stone. > > This is not a forum for "Shut me up if you can" or "Convince me I'm > wrong if you dare." If that is the game you want, I hope you like > solitaire. > > > > > Can you string more than two > > sentences together to do that? If not, you should take your > > assessments of physics to the kindergarten, where you will be in your > > element. NoEinstein - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear PD: :}- ~ - NoEinstein
From: NoEinstein on 9 Aug 2008 17:49 On Aug 9, 12:18 am, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 5, 8:02 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 2, 10:47 am, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 1, 8:43 pm, john <vega...(a)accesscomm.ca> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:13 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:56 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote: > > > > > > > ...but there is no single aether. > > > > > > your theory is an oversimplification. > > > > > > Of course not. There are four and a half ethers. Possibly more, if you > > > > > count the one with the long ears. > > > > > > I do love it when two people idle away the time by *making up stuff on > > > > > the fly* that doesn't mean anything and chucking it at each other.. > > > > > It's kind of like watching two people at a costume party, having a > > > > > conversation by saying things they *imagine* their characters would > > > > > say, being wholly absorbed in the *game* and not at all in what each > > > > > other is saying. > > > > > > PD > > > > > There is the aether in M + M's heads that > > > > they 'disproved' after deciding what it could or could > > > > not do beforehand. > > > > > Of course, Dark Matter is *much more scientific*!! > > > > > Idiot. > > > > Dark matter is not aether. It provides no medium for electromagnetic > > > transmission. > > > > > John- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > PD: Ether has no mass. But tangles of it do. Instead of looking for > > the missing mass, just realize that the estimate of the Universe's > > mass, from Newton's Law of U. G., is wrong. > > The estimate of the universe's mass doesn't come from Newton's law of > U. G. > Please do catch up. > > And I'm curious why tangles of something massless have mass, as you > say. > > > > > Correct that, and you can > > stop the insane searches for mass. NoEinstein - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear PD: The "assumed" masses of the universe are those necessary to hold the orbiting bodies in their observed (Doppler shifted) orbits. And those forces are based on Newton's "Law" of Universal Gravitation which is in error. NoEinstein
From: NoEinstein on 9 Aug 2008 17:56
On Aug 9, 3:07 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > Yuan...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > I'm standing on the Earth, how do you measure my acceleration? > > Remember, you aren't allowed to reference anything to abnything else. > > CLOSED LAB > > You said standing on earth, so I know that the earth moon > system is in free fall around the Sun... but I can't see > the sum moon or stars. > > I can determine that the earth is rotating... > pendulum > gyroscope > > I can determine tidal flexing caused by at least two > bodies... and over time determine that we are likely > in orbit about the sun and a companion moon.... getting > the masses and distances correct... and therefore > determining the forces and acceleration. > > But.... acceleration is absolute and can be measured by > a number of different techniques. > > If one can see starlight, the aberration of starlight > is an accurate way to determine orbital and rotational > velocity. > > > > > Counting is not the same as measuring. > > Counting is a measurement > > > > > A measurement necessitates reference to a standard. > > Most measurements are differential and do not > require a reference standard.... some type of measurement do. > and many standard are easy to find in many laboratories. > > > > > When you count 10 fringe shifts, what does that mean, if you don't > > compare it with some standard count? > > I assume you are asking about the MichelsonMorley experiment > interferometer -- lots of resources on the web. > > > > > > > Love, > > > Jenny- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Dear Sam: Measurements that are "differential" must be "differential" from some 'standard'. Such is the POR, benchmark, fiducial zero or CONTROL. Counting is a measurement from the point of the beginning of the count. I repeat, ALL forms of measurement require a CONTROL! NoEinstein |