What is the Aether?
in [Relativity]
|
From: hanson on 25 May 2007 13:46 "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1180111296.137323.23290(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... [uncle Al] http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sci.physics.new-theories/msg/5c39ac249a4d8fa0 wherin he says: >> Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004) >> http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml >> No aether [hanson] Idiot. The word "aether" is NOT mentioned a single time in your citation... ahahaha.. Al, you have been told this many times before... ahahaha... google groups: 9 hits for: -[ author:hanson(a)quick.net Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004) .... but you do equate your citing lit. with your intellicence.... .... and furthermore along the same vein, as KooWu indicates in your second citation below.. you, Al, just invent something about your cits in your mind that is not even there... ahahaha... That's really severely gifted, Al... ahahaha... Thanks for the laughs! > [KooWu] > Uncle Al presented "Breaking Lorentz Symmetry". > [uncle Al] >> http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7 >> Al Schwartz said: "No Lorentz violation" [KooWu] > In the article ... http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7 it says: > "To a physicist such equality and fairness of physical laws is called > a symmetry, and the symmetry that requires the laws of physics to be > the same for all observers is known as Lorentz symmetry." > [KooWu] > Laws of physics must be the same PERIOD. Or else, the subject of > physics cannot exist. What Lorentz Symmetry deals with is a special > case of this. That is laws of physics cannot be different based on > one's absolute speed. This is the principle of relativity. > > In the article... > "It was Einstein who, in 1905, first used Lorentz symmetry to describe > the laws of physics in our universe." > [KooWu] > No, it was Galileo through his principle of relativity. > > In the article... > "He took Lorentz symmetry as a postulate of special relativity, > whereby he assumed that the laws of physics - including the speed of > light in a vacuum - are the same for all inertial observers." > [KooWu] > Einstein reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform. The two postulates > of SR are the properties of the Lorentz transform. The principle of > relativity as one of the two postulates was already identified by > Galileo several hundreds of years ago. The constancy in the speed of > light was proposed by Voigt to explain the null result of the 1881 > Michelson experiment six years before the more famous Michelson-Morley > experiment. > There are no special frames of reference referred to as 'inertial'. > > In the article... > "These transformations had actually been discovered the previous year > by Hendrik Antoon Lorentz when he was attempting to explain the null > results of the Michelson-Morley experiment." > [KooWu] > The Lorentz transformation was first put together by Larmor after > modifying the Voigt transform to allow for the principle of > relativity. > > In the article... > "Lorentz symmetry has so far withstood the tests of time, but in > recent years theorists have begun to question whether it is indeed an > exact symmetry of nature." > [KooWu] > This is totally BS. Nature shows very clearly the breakdown in the > symmetry. Since there is no such paradox in nature as the time > paradox also known as the twin's paradox, the symmetry must not exist > because the time paradox is a manifestation of both the time dilation > and the principle of relativity at the same time. To resolve this > paradox, either or both time dilation and the principle of relativity > must be wrong. >
From: Androcles on 25 May 2007 13:57 "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wublee(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1180111296.137323.23290(a)k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com... : Uncle Al presented "Breaking Lorentz Symmetry". : : http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7 : : In the article ... : : "To a physicist such equality and fairness of physical laws is called : a symmetry, and the symmetry that requires the laws of physics to be : the same for all observers is known as Lorentz symmetry." Why does it always come down to "observers"? Observers are not objective, they are subjective. : : Laws of physics must be the same PERIOD. Or else, the subject of : physics cannot exist. What Lorentz Symmetry deals with is a special : case of this. That is laws of physics cannot be different based on : one's absolute speed. This is the principle of relativity. : : "It was Einstein who, in 1905, first used Lorentz symmetry to describe : the laws of physics in our universe." : : No, it was Galileo through his principle of relativity. Copernicus made use of the principle of relativity before Galileo. : : "He took Lorentz symmetry as a postulate of special relativity, : whereby he assumed that the laws of physics - including the speed of : light in a vacuum - are the same for all inertial observers." Lies. Einstein's three postulates are: 1) The PoR (an axiom) 2) light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. (False, disproved by Sagnac.) 3) the time required by light to travel from A to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A. (Trivially false, disproved by Cassini-Huyghens at Saturn and the fact that Earth moves. The cuckoo malformations are based on relative movement. ) : : Einstein reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform. The two postulates : of SR are the properties of the Lorentz transform. There are three. Please do not repeat Einstein's own lies. 1) The PoR (an axiom) 2) light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. (False, disproved by Sagnac.) 3) the time required by light to travel from A to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A. (Trivially false, disproved by Cassini-Huyghens at Saturn and the fact that Earth moves. The cuckoo malformations are based on relative movement. ) : The principle of : relativity as one of the two postulates There are three. Please do not repeat Einstein's own lies. 1) The PoR (an axiom) 2) light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body. (False, disproved by Sagnac.) 3) the time required by light to travel from A to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A. (Trivially false, disproved by Cassini-Huyghens at Saturn and the fact that Earth moves. The cuckoo malformations are based on relative movement. )
From: Laurent on 25 May 2007 14:33 On May 25, 12:41 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Uncle Al presented "Breaking Lorentz Symmetry". > > http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7 > > In the article ... > > "To a physicist such equality and fairness of physical laws is called > a symmetry, and the symmetry that requires the laws of physics to be > the same for all observers is known as Lorentz symmetry." > > Laws of physics must be the same PERIOD. Or else, the subject of > physics cannot exist. What Lorentz Symmetry deals with is a special > case of this. That is laws of physics cannot be different based on > one's absolute speed. This is the principle of relativity. > > "It was Einstein who, in 1905, first used Lorentz symmetry to describe > the laws of physics in our universe." > > No, it was Galileo through his principle of relativity. > > "He took Lorentz symmetry as a postulate of special relativity, > whereby he assumed that the laws of physics - including the speed of > light in a vacuum - are the same for all inertial observers." > > Einstein reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform. The two postulates > of SR are the properties of the Lorentz transform. The principle of > relativity as one of the two postulates was already identified by > Galileo several hundreds of years ago. The constancy in the speed of > light was proposed by Voigt to explain the null result of the 1881 > Michelson experiment six years before the more famous Michelson-Morley > experiment. > > There are no special frames of reference referred to as 'inertial'. > > "These transformations had actually been discovered the previous year > by Hendrik Antoon Lorentz when he was attempting to explain the null > results of the Michelson-Morley experiment." > > The Lorentz transformation was first put together by Larmor after > modifying the Voigt transform to allow for the principle of > relativity. > > "Lorentz symmetry has so far withstood the tests of time, but in > recent years theorists have begun to question whether it is indeed an > exact symmetry of nature." > > This is totally BS. Nature shows very clearly the breakdown in the > symmetry. Since there is no such paradox in nature as the time > paradox also known as the twin's paradox, the symmetry must not exist > because the time paradox is a manifestation of both the time dilation > and the principle of relativity at the same time. To resolve this > paradox, either or both time dilation and the principle of relativity > must be wrong. The propagation speed of fields must be kept constant in order for internal processes to continue. As an object reaches the speed of light (the speed at which fields propagate) and since energy is finite, there are time dilations and length contractions in order to compensate.
From: Androcles on 25 May 2007 14:45 "Laurent" <cyberdyno(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1180117990.511469.295550(a)g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... : The propagation speed of fields must be kept constant in order for : internal processes to continue. As an object reaches the speed of : light (the speed at which fields propagate) and since energy is : finite, there are time dilations and length contractions in order to : compensate. Bullshit. What happens when the "object" goes in the other direction?
From: Sam Wormley on 25 May 2007 14:54
Laurent wrote: > > OK, so what would you call the space between particles? > Space |