How can the MMx math be corrected?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: What is the experimentally measurable difference between rest mass and the 'relativistic mass' of the photon ??!!
Next: Dark Matter hipotessis
From: harald on 20 May 2010 06:51 On May 20, 1:30 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1e5a95e0-312d-431a-9822-3995e7355f0f(a)e28g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... > > > On May 17, 9:37 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in > >> messagenews:00cb267f-d23d-43d4-a877-28e163decae6(a)q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com... > > >>>and the null result did not change anything about light, > >>it changed what was known about light > > > Like what? > > Study up on the history of aether theory and of EMR if you don't know. The > very fact that the result was unexpected meant there need to be a > change in how light was understood. Wrong, instead the understanding of mechanics theory was changed. The special theory of relativity has crystallised out from the Maxwell- Lorentz theory of electromagnetic phenomena. All facts of experience which support the electromagnetic theory also support the theory of relativity. Harald
From: harald on 20 May 2010 06:55 On May 20, 5:06 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote: > On May 19, 10:01 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: [..] > > > DDRR seems to be confusing the two theories. > > I'm shocked, shocked to find that confusion is going on in here! > > Sue... Hi Sue, don't you think it's amusing?
From: Inertial on 20 May 2010 07:06 "harald" <hvan(a)swissonline.ch> wrote in message news:0acfa033-9d0d-4e1d-8f78-0cf9d9bad4db(a)i31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com... > On May 20, 1:30 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in >> messagenews:1e5a95e0-312d-431a-9822-3995e7355f0f(a)e28g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... >> >> > On May 17, 9:37 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in >> >> messagenews:00cb267f-d23d-43d4-a877-28e163decae6(a)q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com... >> >> >>>and the null result did not change anything about light, >> >>it changed what was known about light >> >> > Like what? >> >> Study up on the history of aether theory and of EMR if you don't know. >> The >> very fact that the result was unexpected meant there need to be a >> change in how light was understood. > > Wrong, Nope. Stop deluding yourself. > instead the understanding of mechanics theory was changed. The > special theory of relativity has crystallised out from the Maxwell- > Lorentz theory of electromagnetic phenomena. All facts of experience > which support the electromagnetic theory also support the theory of > relativity. > > Harald
From: harald on 20 May 2010 07:39 On May 20, 1:06 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > "harald" <h...(a)swissonline.ch> wrote in message > > news:0acfa033-9d0d-4e1d-8f78-0cf9d9bad4db(a)i31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On May 20, 1:30 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in > >> messagenews:1e5a95e0-312d-431a-9822-3995e7355f0f(a)e28g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On May 17, 9:37 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > >> >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in > >> >> messagenews:00cb267f-d23d-43d4-a877-28e163decae6(a)q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com... > > >> >>>and the null result did not change anything about light, > >> >>it changed what was known about light > > >> > Like what? > > >> Study up on the history of aether theory and of EMR if you don't know. > >> The > >> very fact that the result was unexpected meant there need to be a > >> change in how light was understood. > > > Wrong, > > Nope. Stop deluding yourself. > > > instead the understanding of mechanics theory was changed. The > > special theory of relativity has crystallised out from the Maxwell- > > Lorentz theory of electromagnetic phenomena. All facts of experience > > which support the electromagnetic theory also support the theory of > > relativity. > > > Harald As I cited from Einstein it's you who is deluding yourself. But I don't care if you continue with that. ;-)
From: Inertial on 20 May 2010 08:04
"harald" <hvan(a)swissonline.ch> wrote in message news:64d3e64f-1294-4ea2-90d8-93335f47f715(a)q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com... > On May 20, 1:06 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> "harald" <h...(a)swissonline.ch> wrote in message >> >> news:0acfa033-9d0d-4e1d-8f78-0cf9d9bad4db(a)i31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> > On May 20, 1:30 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in >> >> messagenews:1e5a95e0-312d-431a-9822-3995e7355f0f(a)e28g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> > On May 17, 9:37 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: >> >> >> "Da Do Ron Ron" <ron_ai...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in >> >> >> messagenews:00cb267f-d23d-43d4-a877-28e163decae6(a)q23g2000vba.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >>>and the null result did not change anything about light, >> >> >>it changed what was known about light >> >> >> > Like what? >> >> >> Study up on the history of aether theory and of EMR if you don't know. >> >> The >> >> very fact that the result was unexpected meant there need to be a >> >> change in how light was understood. >> >> > Wrong, >> >> Nope. Stop deluding yourself. >> >> > instead the understanding of mechanics theory was changed. The >> > special theory of relativity has crystallised out from the Maxwell- >> > Lorentz theory of electromagnetic phenomena. All facts of experience >> > which support the electromagnetic theory also support the theory of >> > relativity. >> >> > Harald > > As I cited from Einstein it's you who is deluding yourself. But I > don't care if you continue with that. ;-) I don't care who you misquote or think you are citing .. MMx changed how light was thought about. Get over it. |