"Quadibloc" <email@example.com> wrote in message news:firstname.lastname@example.org... |I read Herbert Dingle's original paper. His claim that Special | Relativity was inconsistent was based on working out the Twins Paradox | in two ways and getting different answers - because in one case "time | at a distance" was explicit, and because he didn't believe in it, he | didn't use it. | | This is like proving arithmetic is inconsistent because you don't | believe in carries, and so you add two numbers in two different ways, | one in which the operation is hidden (so you get the right answer), | and one in which carrying is explicit, and you intentionally neglect | to do it - so you get the wrong answer, and the two answers don't | agree. | | I'm sorry, but this sort of thing proves only that he can't be taken | seriously. | | John Savard | You are midway between two candles, travelling toward one and away from the other. The speed of light from one candle is "measured" (Einstein's word) to be c when it is in fact c+v and the speed of light from the other candle is measured to be c when it is in fact c-v. You're sorry, but this sort of thing proves only that you are fucking stupid.