Search All of the Math Forum:
Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by
NCTM or The Math Forum.


Math Forum
»
Discussions
»
sci.math.*
»
sci.math
Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.
Topic:
Relativity in terms of False Premises
Replies:
4
Last Post:
Mar 18, 2013 9:18 PM




Re: Relativity in terms of False Premises
Posted:
Mar 17, 2013 1:39 AM


On Mar 16, 6:08 am, Wayne Callahan <wca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Among many others, relativity is based on the following weird premise: > > 1. The METER [M] determines the SPEED of LIGHT [SoL] > 2. The SPEED of LIGHT [SoL] determines the METER [M] > > Obviously, those are indefinite recursive function, with no start nor end. > > Any comments?
You got SR all wrong. SR is not about the definition of the speed of light in that circular understanding you have pointed out. SR is the interpretation on the real world to the Lorentz transform and nothing else. <shrug>
If one reverseengineered the Lorentz transform, there are two assumptions that this mathematical model is built out of. These two guesses, glorified as intelligent and educated guesses called postulates, are what foundation of SR is in the first place. The first assumption is the principle of relativity which has never been verified without any circular references similar to the one you have raised. The second assumption on the constancy of the speed of light is a suggestion of Voigt who saw wisely as a necessary requirement to satisfy the null results of the MMX, and that took place in 1887. The selfstyled physicists have never given credits to Voigt for that instead they gave it to the fvckwit they have worshipped  Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar. Why is that? Because the principle of relativity was already characterized by Galileo at least three bloody centuries before. They had to credit their demigod with something that the fvckwit never had originally come up with. It is all in history. <shrug>
Before the Lorentz transform, there was Larmor?s transform which along with the Voigt transform was one of the infinite many that satisfy the null results of the MMX. As a consequence, they also satisfy the second postulate of SR  the constancy in the speed of light  but not the first one  the principle of relativity. <shrug>
All these transforms  the Voigt, Larmor?s, the other infinite numbers, and the good old Galilean transform  are tales of three points  two observers observing the same observed. Each transform merely relates how the two observers observe the same observed  the same event as observed by two observers. In particular, these non Galilean type transforms including Larmor?s transform say the Aether must exist since they all reference any observations back to the absolute frame of reference. It turns out that if these two observers are moving in parallel to each against the stationary background of the absolute frame of reference, any reference to the absolute frame of reference would disappear in the mathematics. In doing so, the Lorentz transform is born where the Lorentz transform only is valid in this very special circumstance. Extending the law of physics occurring in this very special circumstance to the rest and general case, the Lorentz transform is born. Thus, it is totally fvcked up in the first place. <shrug>
Koobee Wublee seems to be the only one who has realized this mathematical error after more than a hundred years. Well, it is very lonely at the top indeed. Does that mean Koobee Wublee believes in Larmor?s transform? Well, all these transforms discovered by Lorentz, including the Voigt, and Larmor?s transforms, that satisfy the null results of the MMX manifest some and varying degrees of time contradictions. The most severe case is the twin?s paradox manifested by the Lorentz transform. Thus, they cannot be valid. <shrug>
The only transform left is the Galilean transform interpreting light as classical particles with nonzero rest mass. This means the ballistic theory of light which actually explains quite well on the null results of the MMX. However, the hypothesis completely rejects all the works put together so far in electromagnetism, and this is a more serious flaw. <shrug>
Thus, what the selfstyled physicists are so confident in is actually very seriously flawed. The truth is still out there. Koobee Wublee personally thinks electromagnetism has to be modified along with the Galilean transform in order to cope with the reality in the null results of the MMX and wavelight nature in light  the very existence of the Aether. <shrug>
Koobee Wublee is impartial to the Aether, but all the experimental results seem to point to the very existence of the Aether as the best course tested with rigorous scientific methodologies. Any serious scientist must not downplay any experimental results properly interpreted so. So, what is Koobee Wublee missing? <shrug>



