Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: What is or is not a paradox?
Replies: 22   Last Post: Jan 11, 2013 2:06 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 49
Registered: 12/16/09
Re: What is or is not a paradox?
Posted: Jan 2, 2013 9:14 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Jan 2, 12:38 pm, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 10:07 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
>

> > [snipped SR sermons]
>
> > At present, there are no experiments that refute SR.
>
> > [snipped more SR scriptures]
>
> > But this process won't start until there is some real experiment that is
> > inconsistent with SR. Until then all you have is dreams and hallucinations,
> > which aren't science.

>
> Given two hypotheses where each is an antithesis to and thus
> invalidates the other, the common sense says one must find experiments
> to validate only one of the hypotheses.  This is scientific method.
> Tom has bragged about these experimental verifications for SR since he
> became a priest to SR long away.  Yet, these experimental
> verifications (every single one of them with no exceptions) also
> verify any of the antitheses to SR.  Thus, claiming SR valid because
> it is verified by all sorts of experiments is just plain stupid, lack
> of professionalism, misapplication of scientific method, and downright
> deceitful.  This is not science anymore but a voodoo cult.  <shrug>
>
> Antitheses to SR are:
>
> **  Voigt transformation
> **  Larmor?s transformation
> **  Infinite transformations discovered by Lorentz
>
> Each one says the Aether must exist.  Each one satisfies the null
> results of the MMX and more.  <shrug>
>
> The following sum up the self-styled physicists.
>
> **          FAITH IS LOGIC
> **          LYING IS TEACHING
> **         DECEIT IS VALIDATION
> **         NITWIT IS GENIUS
> **         OCCULT IS SCIENCE
> **        FICTION IS THEORY
> **        FUDGING IS DERIVATION
> **        PARADOX IS KOSHER
> **        WORSHIP IS STUDY
> **       BULLSHIT IS TRUTH
> **      ARROGANCE IS SAGE
> **      BELIEVING IS LEARNING
> **      IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
> **      MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
> **      SCRIPTURE IS AXIOM
> **     CONJECTURE IS REALITY
> **     HANDWAVING IS REASONING
> **     PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
> **     PRIESTHOOD IS TENURE
> **    FRAUDULENCE IS FACT
> **    MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS
> **  INCONSISTENCY IS CONSISTENCY
> ** INTERPRETATION IS VERIFICATION
>
> <shrug>


This reminds me of the Young/Forbes toothed-wheel of 1891- the toothed-
wheel observed two line of sight light sources that were separated by
a distance- and determined that their distances were instant and
simultaneous through the aperture of the wheel. This at once, created
extreme criticism because it predicted something that was not
anticipated like the results of the MM experiment.



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

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.