The Math Forum

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: Einstein used the wrong equations for relativity
Replies: 4   Last Post: Mar 24, 2013 1:29 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Koobee Wublee

Posts: 1,417
Registered: 2/21/06
Re: Einstein used the wrong equations for relativity
Posted: Mar 21, 2013 3:32 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Mar 20, 5:07 pm, "T.M. Sommers" wrote:
> On 3/20/2013 8:46 AM, wrote:

> > Well, I certainly would not have told Maxwell that, but I will tell
> > you. I took physics in high school, and if you say you are a real
> > physicist, all I can tell you is that you don't know what you are
> > doing. Maxwell obviously could not have used any other equations but
> > the Galilean transformation equations in deriving his because in
> > 1889, the year he died, there were no other equations around.

> What Maxwell and his contemporaries thought is irrelevant. What matters
> is the math.

Dude, get a clue. Physics is about mathematical models, and it is all
about the math, the math, and the math. Only with the math, you can
predict things that carefully and impartially designed experiments can
test your predictions based on the mathematics. Maxwell?s works were
all based on math as well. <shrug>

> > It
> > does not surprise me that the people you call real physicists were
> > able to adapt Maxwell's equations to the Lorentz equations.

> No adaptation was necessary. Maxwell's equations transform quite nicely
> under the Lorentz transformation.

Nonsense, if you are able to define a set of rules on transformation
of coordinate systems, anything can be transformed according to your
rules whether they are totally absurd or not. This is all in the
mathematics. In the past, a few self-styled physicists were able to
show that Maxwell?s equations do satisfy the principle of relativity
when the coordinate system is transformed according to the Lorentz
transform. Have you gone through the math to fully accept that
bullshit? <shrug>

> They do not transform under the Galilean transformation.

Maxwell?s equations + Galilean transform = Prediction of the Aether,
and there is nothing wrong mathematically with that. The only thing
to falsify the consequence is to show experimentally the converse. So
far, no experiments have adequately shown so including the null
results of the MMX. <shrug>

> Maxwell's equations and the wave equation are differential equations.

More nonsense from a math-illiterate individual. Are you a prostitute
doing lip service for self-styled physicists? In free space (vacuum),
Maxwell?s equations directly lead to wave equations that predict a
whole bunch of solutions. One of these solutions allows light to
propagate through a medium with definitive permittivity and
permeability as its properties. The predicted medium is now called
the Aether which before the MMX, 100% of the physicists believed the
full existence of the Aether with no doubts. <shrug>

> You would
> not even understand the notation. But if you insist, look at page 505
> of Jackson (2nd ed.), or chapter 15 of Panofsky and Phillips.

You need to understand chapter 1 of all the textbooks you are tossing
around first. <shrug>

> I will quote here what Jackson has to say:
> <quote>
> When Einstein began to think about these matters there existed several
> possibilities:
> 1) The Maxwell equations were incorrect. The proper theory of
> electromagnetism was invariant under Galilean transformation.

No, this is not the case. Maxwell?s equations with the Galilean
transform predict the existence of the Aether. That means any
transformations have to somehow refer back to the absolute frame of
reference. So, Maxwell?s equations cannot be shown incorrect just
because some nitwit does claim so. Maxwell?s equations can only be
shown invalid through experimentations. <shrug>

> 2) Galilean relativity applied to classical mechanics, but
> electromagnetism had a preferred reference frame, the frame in which the
> luminiferous ether was at rest.

Yes, this is true considering Maxwell?s equations. This shows how you
have misunderstood 1) above. <shrug>

> 3) There existed a relativity principle for both classical mechanics and
> electromagnetism, but it was not Galilean relativity, This wou.d imply
> that the laws of mechanics ere in need of modification.
> </quote>

Well, you can always define any model of coordinate transformations to
Maxwell?s equations. The results would suggest mathematical
validities in any endeavors. Again, you can only prove the validity
of your mathematical coordinate transformation through
experimentations. <shrug>

> > The Lorentz equations are really just a special case of the Galilean
> > transformation equations.

> You have that backwards.

In thorough mathematical investigations, you both are wrong. The
Lorentz transform manifests all sorts of contradictions (including the
twins? paradox) while the Galilean transform does not. The Lorentz
transform has no chance of being right while the Galilean transform
must be valid under ?weak? conditions. An example of a ?weak?
condition is low speeds. <shrug>

> > Sorry if this doesn't help you. If it
> > doesn't, maybe there are some nice real physicists you can talk to
> > about it.

> I repeat: I was not asking for your help. I was trying, unsuccessfully,
> to help you understand why you are wrong.

Man, you have admitted to be very illiterate in physics and
mathematics. Just what sensible arguments can you conjure up to help
someone understand the subject? You are an illiterate clown in
physics who thinks he has understood everything. You and David Waite
really belong to each other. You two are a joke. <shrug>

> You need to study lots of math, and lots of physics, before you can hope
> to talk intelligently about these matters.

When are you going to start doing just that? <shrug>

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2018. All Rights Reserved.