Known physics defeated by simple puzzle?
in [Relativity]
|
From: spudnik on 15 Apr 2010 18:50 so, your hand-wave theory has "photons" that go faster than the speed of light; wow, cool. > IOTAs, that compose matter is 'c'. That's why photons get slung out > of the valence rings of atoms at 'c'. But if those atoms are, > themselves, moving at .5 'c', then, the velocity of the photons could > be a maximum of 1.5 'c'; and a minimum of .5 'c'. depending on the > angle of emission relative to the velocity vector. "Matter is: thus: no; I know of only one fundamental wave, which you & the Einsteiniacs & the Newtoniacs refer to as a corpuscle -- quelle absurdite'! and there are many others, all of which are always said to go through a medium: Alfven, Love, Rayleigh etc.; so, why should waves of light be known, only as an obscure apparatus-finding, the "photo-electrical effect Nobel?" Albert Einstein - Revue "Science", 1925 "Si les observations du Dr Miller étaient confirmées, la théorie de la relativité serait en défaut. L'expérience est le juge suprème". http://allais.maurice.free.fr/Paradoxe.htm
From: spudnik on 15 Apr 2010 21:09 it's funny, that what he leads-off with in the "moving bodies" paper, is exactly the issue that he flubbed; there is a difference between those two experiments, as strange as that may seem. but, say el laroucheez, that mistake actually belons to Maxwell's algebraization. you can find plenty of citation & dyscussion on http://21stcenturysciencetech.com -- sorry! > http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf >http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s4-07/4-07.htm thus: thou casteth aspersions?... thou cans't read it?.... I must use all default "read more" nettiket time-space-wasters, to increase the apparent vastness o'the googolplex?... ah; I see, said the deafmute -- yes, Sir!... thus: nice analogy. now, if you simply insist upon *not* looking at light as both a wave & a photon -- since you can use either analogy by itself, to keep it in the range of mathematical tractability -- you will see that absurdities or just complications are avoided by sticking with the ordinary (spatial) wave "in time," as all of the ground- breakers in this field did, with the hold-out of Newton -- no/wrong theory -- and Einstein -- one "effect" in a device ... DING (Nobel !-) > Field lines don't really indicate anything moving. Kinks in the > field line move. thus: the clocks are distorted by the curvature that was demonstrated by Aristarchus, and surveyed o'er Alsace-Lorraine by Gauss (with his theodolite .-) yes, time is not a dimension, or it is the only dimension, whereby we observe the others (Bucky's formulation). not only was Newton's law actually found by Hooke, but it was derived directly from Kepler's orbital constraints (and, Kepler thought that Sun was perhaps magnetic on planets, which may-well turn out to be more accurate than "gravitons" -- as long as you get rid of Newton's silly corpuscles, "photons" -- and his platonic ordering of the planets has alos proved to be more-or-less correct (if I could find that article, that gave a formula that was effective for all moons, as well). BTW, use quaternions for special rel., which shows the uniqueness of the "real, scalar, inner product" time/ dimension of Hamilton. --Light: A History! http://21stcenturysciencetech.com
From: NoEinstein on 16 Apr 2010 02:16 On Apr 15, 6:47 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear Spudnik: The dictionary defines corpuscle as a small 'particle', not a wave. No particle should ever require a medium. Because light can travel off of the line-of-sight at slits, that fact was wrongly presumed to be because there was a 'water-like or air-like' medium that can form ripples. But light can travel perfectly well through the Swiss Cheese voids between the galaxies, that have been scavenged of ether for building the stars and the galaxies. So, light does NOT require a medium! Light is small, evenly spaced (for each color) packets of IOTAs too small to qualify as matter, but able to transfer some ether away from the more massive areas. Without that transfer, the ether which flows DOWN as gravity would soon stop. The Black Hole at the center of Andromeda proves that process, because the gravity SHUT OFF when the massive star went blacknothing out, means nothing in! The shut-off of the central gravity caused the stars that were about to be sucked into the larger star, to fly off on their tangents. That left a gap in the star distribution next to the center, right where the stars should be most dense. These are part of my broad contribution to the New Science. NoEinstein > > no; I know of only one fundamental wave, > which you & the Einsteiniacs & the Newtoniacs refer > to as a corpuscle -- quelle absurdite'! > > and there are many others, all of which are always said > to go through a medium: Alfven, Love, Rayleigh etc.; so, > why should waves of light be known, > only as an obscure apparatus-finding, > the "photo-electrical effect Nobel?" > > > Dear Spudnik: If you believe everything is a wave rather than quanta > > or particles, then, you have been sleeping on a water-bed for too > > long! > > Albert Einstein - Revue "Science", 1925 > "Si les observations du Dr Miller étaient confirmées, la théorie de > la > relativité serait en défaut. L'expérience est le juge suprème".http://allais.maurice.free.fr/Paradoxe.htm
From: NoEinstein on 16 Apr 2010 02:30 On Apr 15, 6:50 pm, spudnik <Space...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Dear Spudnik: All photons are EMITTED at the speed of light, 'c'. But the velocity of the source adds to or subtracts from that velocity. Sound emitted by a moving source will elevate in pitch approaching, and fall in pitch, going away. If a baseball is thrown from the bow of a speedboat, the ball and the boat speed add. It the same person pitches the ball from the stern of the boat, the speed of the boat subtracts from the speed of the ball. Using that same logical assumption for light, I determined that the M-M experiment didn't have a CONTROL light course. Using simple 9th grade algebra, I verified that the total circuit time of all emitted photons in M-M never varies regardless of the orientation of the apparatus, and the velocity of the Earth. Please read the following to better understand why that is. NoEinstein Where Angels Fear to Fall http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/8152ef3e... Replicating NoEinsteins Invalidation of M-M (at sci.math) http://groups.google.com/group/sci.math/browse_thread/thread/d9f9852639d5d9e1/dcb2a1511b7b2603?hl=en&lnk=st&q=#dcb2a1511b7b2603 > > so, your hand-wave theory has "photons" that go > faster than the speed of light; wow, cool. > > > IOTAs, that compose matter is 'c'. That's why photons get slung out > > of the valence rings of atoms at 'c'. But if those atoms are, > > themselves, moving at .5 'c', then, the velocity of the photons could > > be a maximum of 1.5 'c'; and a minimum of .5 'c'. depending on the > > angle of emission relative to the velocity vector. "Matter is: > > thus: > no; I know of only one fundamental wave, > which you & the Einsteiniacs & the Newtoniacs refer > to as a corpuscle -- quelle absurdite'! > > and there are many others, all of which are always said > to go through a medium: Alfven, Love, Rayleigh etc.; so, > why should waves of light be known, > only as an obscure apparatus-finding, > the "photo-electrical effect Nobel?" > > Albert Einstein - Revue "Science", 1925 > "Si les observations du Dr Miller étaient confirmées, la théorie de > la > relativité serait en défaut. L'expérience est le juge suprème".http://allais.maurice.free.fr/Paradoxe.htm
From: Sue... on 16 Apr 2010 06:21
On Apr 16, 2:52 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s4-07/4-07.htm > > > <<...pseudoscientists rarely revise. The first > > edition of a pseudoscience book is almost always > > the last, even though the book remains in print > > for decades or even centuries. Even books with > > obvious mistakes, errors, and misprints on every > > age may be reprinted as is, over and over. Compare > > this to science textbooks that see a new edition > > every few years because of the rapid accumulation > > of new facts and insights.>> http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html > > > Sue...- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Dear Sue: Most of the textbooks at universities keep getting thicker > year by year. That's because no one in those places has the BALLS to > weed-out the errant stuff. Einstein is still being taught in every > technical university, even though I proved, about ten years ago, that > both SR and GR are wrong. To wit: SR violates the Law of the > Conservation of Energy; and the mechanism of gravity is downward > flowing ether caused by photon exchangenot "warped" space-time. You > seem to be very smart, but your theories tend toward the status quo > "textbook" stuff, rather than the latest, rational thinking. You are unlikely to learn about my favourite theories in a thread about SR, LET and pseudo-science. Emergent gravity << << 6.3 Emergent gravity One of the more fascinating approaches to quantum gravity is the suggestion, typically attributed to Sakharov that gravity itself may not be fundamental physics. It is now a relatively common opinion, maybe not mainstream but definitely a strong minority opinion, that gravity (and in particular the whole notion of spacetime and spacetime geometry) might be no more fundamental than is fluid dynamics. The word fundamental is here used in a rather technical sense - fluid mechanics is not fundamental because there is a known underlying microphysics, that of molecular dynamics, of which fluid mechanics is only the low-energy low-momentum limit. >> http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2005-12/articlesu25.html#x34-720006.3 Sakharov's induced gravity: a modern perspective http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0204062 The Origin of Gravity Authors: C. P. Kouropoulos http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0107015 http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0107015v1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritz_London ~GRavity pipeline~ http://www.research.ibm.com/grape/index.html#work Sue... > NoEinstein |