Prev: What makes a good scientist?
Next: Systematic begging of questions by scientists revealed by Jones: "Are they human or monkeys?" and: "Do they rattle bones?" asks Jones of philosophic usenet group: Atheists ignore him in unusual display of perspicacity
From: John Jones on 29 Mar 2010 06:20
Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Theoretically, the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment can
> be obtained by assuming that:
>
> (A) The speed of light varies with the speed of the light source (c'=c
> +v); the principle of relativity is correct; there are no miracles
> (length contraction, time dilation).
>
> (B) Einstein's 1905 light postulate (c'=c) is correct; the principle
> of relativity is correct; there are miracles (length contraction, time
> dilation).
>
> There is no reasonable third alternative. That is, Newton's emission
> theory of light with its constitutive equation c'=c+v is the ONLY
> alternative to special relativity. Moreover, the emission theory is
> TRUE and special relativity FALSE unless one finds natural that a
> long train can be trapped inside a short tunnel, an 80m long pole can
> be trapped inside a 40m long barn and a bug can be both dead and
> alive:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIyDfo_mY&mode=related&search
>
> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/barn_pole.html
> "These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors
> at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a
> switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in
> the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the
> speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special
> Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the
> direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if
> the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the
> reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes
> through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the
> barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your
> switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least
> momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The
> runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept
> shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If
> the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest
> in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no
> such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not
> stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it
> was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it
> is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back
> to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other
> end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be
> trapped in a compressed state inside the barn."
>
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Relativ/bugrivet.html
> "The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is
> similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the
> bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it
> looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's
> point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just
> 0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the
> bug....The paradox is not resolved."
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pvalev(a)yahoo.com
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: What makes a good scientist?
Next: Systematic begging of questions by scientists revealed by Jones: "Are they human or monkeys?" and: "Do they rattle bones?" asks Jones of philosophic usenet group: Atheists ignore him in unusual display of perspicacity