SR is not wrong but it is incomplete
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: colp, why did AE use the word "relativity"?
Next: Witness the physical effect as matter converts to aether
From: eric gisse on 13 Jul 2010 03:44 colp wrote: [...] > The Hafele-Keating does not support Einstein's Principle of Relativity > because the math only works from a single frame of reference. How would someone who can't handle the math actually know anything about it?
From: Inertial on 13 Jul 2010 21:36 "colp" wrote in message news:04e70866-c35a-4872-b577-51ca98637cad(a)z30g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > > >The Hafele-Keating does not support Einstein's Principle of Relativity >because the math only works from a single frame of reference. Outright lies. You are a dishonest person
From: Michael Moroney on 14 Jul 2010 00:29 kenseto <kenseto(a)erinet.com> writes: >On Jul 12, 10:05 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Jul 12, 8:43 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: >> >> Ken, you repeatedly lie about the nonexistence of experiments, just >> because you don't know about them. >> >> Repeating, Ken: You need to READ more about what experiments have been >> performed to test various aspects of special relativity. Just because >> you only know about two or three (and those two or three you don't >> understand very well) doesn't mean the other tests haven't been done. >> You need to EDUCATE yourself. >Assertion is not a valid arguement. There is no experiment confirming >mutual time dilation. >> >> > The GPS refute the >> > idea of mutal time dilation. >> >> You are simply repeating the same mistake. SR does not predict mutual >> time dilation for the GPS case. Any attempt to misuse SR to lay its >> claims where SR says they wouldn't apply, is simply pilot error. >ROTFLOL....if mutual time dilation exists then it should apply to any >situation. The GPS refute mutual time dilation because: >from the Ground clock point of view the SR effect in the GPS clock is >7 us/day running slow and from the GPS point of view the SR effect on >the ground clock is ~7 us/day running fast. No mutual time dialtion >there. Assertion is not a valid arguement. There is no experiment confirming that from the Ground clock point of view the SR effect in the GPS clock is 7 us/day running slow and from the GPS point of view the SR effect on the ground clock is ~7 us/day running fast.
From: kenseto on 14 Jul 2010 08:21 On Jul 14, 12:29 am, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: > kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes: > >On Jul 12, 10:05 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 12, 8:43 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > >> Ken, you repeatedly lie about the nonexistence of experiments, just > >> because you don't know about them. > > >> Repeating, Ken: You need to READ more about what experiments have been > >> performed to test various aspects of special relativity. Just because > >> you only know about two or three (and those two or three you don't > >> understand very well) doesn't mean the other tests haven't been done. > >> You need to EDUCATE yourself. > >Assertion is not a valid arguement. There is no experiment confirming > >mutual time dilation. > > >> > The GPS refute the > >> > idea of mutal time dilation. > > >> You are simply repeating the same mistake. SR does not predict mutual > >> time dilation for the GPS case. Any attempt to misuse SR to lay its > >> claims where SR says they wouldn't apply, is simply pilot error. > >ROTFLOL....if mutual time dilation exists then it should apply to any > >situation. The GPS refute mutual time dilation because: > >from the Ground clock point of view the SR effect in the GPS clock is > >7 us/day running slow and from the GPS point of view the SR effect on > >the ground clock is ~7 us/day running fast. No mutual time dialtion > >there. > > Assertion is not a valid arguement. There is no experiment confirming > that from the Ground clock point of view the SR effect in the GPS clock is > 7 us/day running slow and from the GPS point of view the SR effect on > the ground clock is ~7 us/day running fast. Hey idiot....the GPSA confirm what I said. You are stupid. Ken Seto - Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: PD on 15 Jul 2010 17:10
On Jul 13, 1:43 am, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: > On Jul 13, 2:05 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 12, 8:43 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > No....no experiment confirm mutual time dilation. > > > Ken, you repeatedly lie about the nonexistence of experiments, just > > because you don't know about them. > > So you should be able to describe experiments that confirm mutual time > dilation if they actually exist, right? I have, thanks. > > > > > Repeating, Ken: You need to READ more about what experiments have been > > performed to test various aspects of special relativity. > > The Hafele-Keating does not support Einstein's Principle of Relativity > because the math only works from a single frame of reference. Don't be ridiculous. The principle of relativity does not say "Expect the same observed outcome in all inertial reference frames." It also does not say "The math you use in one inertial frame will be identical to the math you will use in a different reference frame." I've already told you what the principle of relativity says, and you still don't seem to know what that is. PD |