In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com wrote:
> The premise was simple... > > Clocks E and M in inertial frames E and M are at rest with respect to > one another. The rate of clock E in frame E (E1) is by definition > equal to the clock rate of M in frame M (M1), or E1=M1. Let clock M > now move with respect to E, with relative constant velocity v. It is > easily shown that the new rate of the moving clock M in frame M (M2) > is equal to its old rate (M1), or M2=M1. It is also easily shown that > the new rate of clock E in frame E (E2) is equal to its old rate (E1), > or E2=E1. > > The obvious conclusion is that M2=E2. This disproves Special > Relativity (SR) since time becomes constant in any inertial frame. > > > Relativity physicists scramble for a 'scientific' defense. The > defenses are: > > 1) "It does not take into account the Lorentz transformation > equations". The LTE however assumes beforehand that SR is already > correct. > 2) "It disagrees with experiment." The experiment being the so-called > Muon experiment, which assumed that the premise of time dilation is > correct in its interpretation of the result. > 3) The last resort is to invoke General Relativity. This is like > proving a theorem A by invoking corollary A, which had followed from > the same theorem. > > When all these circular defenses are exposed, the relativists resort > to the their last options: > 1) Ad hominems > 2) Non-sequiturs > 3) Other 'trolling' techniques > > One would think that a supposedly solid theory as Einstein's Theories > of Relativity could mount up a better defense than that typically > employed by highly paid lawyers defending a losing client. > > Thanks.
No scientific theory can be proven, only supported by evidence. Special relativity is supported by a great deal of evidence. Also, whether special relativity is right or wrong it is mathematically self-consistent. There are no mistakes in algebra, or logic. Sorry if you can't keep up, but generations of very good mathematicians have confirmed that there is nothing wrong with the math.