Three Experiments Challenging SRT

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Masterov, Jun 12, 2012.

  1. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    If mom is coming to me her (visual) size increases.
    If the mother are go from me - her (visual) size is reduced.
    This is an optical effect.

    The physical size of my mothers is absolute.


    Если мама приближается, её (визуальный) размер увеличивается.
    Если мама удаляется – размер уменьшается.
    Это и есть оптический эффект.

    Физический размер мамы является абсолютным.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. rpenner Fully Wired Staff Member

    And not related to relativity in any way.
    This is your assumption, which is not supported by physical experiment to the contradiction of the tested assumptions of special relativity.

    You assume, without evidence on your side and ignore evidence not on your side.
    Physics assumes, then tests those assumptions and rejects them if they don't agree with the universe.
    Thus, what you are doing is not physics.

    Rotation mixes up displacement in one direction with displacement in a different direction, leaving displacement in the mutually orthogonal direction (and displacement in time) unchanged.

    \(ct' = ct \\ x' = x \\ y' = y \, \cos \theta \; - \; z \, \sin \theta \\ z' = y \, \sin \theta \; + \; z \, \cos \theta\)

    Or in the language of linear algebra:
    \(\begin{pmatrix}c t' \\ x' \\ y' \\ z' \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \cos \theta & - \sin \theta \\ 0 & 0 & \sin \theta & \cos \theta \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}c t' \\ x' \\ y' \\ z' \end{pmatrix}\)

    Or, taking advantage of this being a linear relationship:
    \(\begin{pmatrix}c \Delta t' \\ \Delta x' \\ \Delta y' \\ \Delta z' \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \cos \theta & - \sin \theta \\ 0 & 0 & \sin \theta & \cos \theta \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}c \Delta t' \\ \Delta x' \\ \Delta y' \\ \Delta z' \end{pmatrix}\)

    Which preserves the invariant:
    \(c^2 (\Delta t')^2 - (\Delta x')^2 - (\Delta y')^2 - (\Delta z')^2 \quad \quad \quad = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y \, \cos \theta \; - \; \Delta z \, \sin \theta)^2 - (\Delta y \, \sin \theta \; + \; \Delta z \, \cos \theta)^2 \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - \left((\Delta y)^2 \, \cos^2 \theta \; - \; 2 \Delta y \Delta z \, \sin \theta \, \cos \theta \; + \; (\Delta z)^2 \, \sin^2 \theta \right) - \left( (\Delta y)^2 \, \sin^2 \theta \; + \; 2 \Delta y \Delta z \, \sin \theta \, \cos \theta \; + \; (\Delta z)^2 \, \cos^2 \theta \right)^2 \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - \left( (\Delta y)^2 \, \cos^2 \theta \; + (\Delta y)^2 \, \sin^2 \theta \right) - \left( (\Delta z)^2 \, \sin^2 \theta \; + \; (\Delta z)^2 \, \cos^2 \theta \right)^2 \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad \quad = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 \)

    Linear motion mixes up displacement in time with displacement in a particular spatial direction, leaving displacement in other spatial directions unchanged.

    \(ct' = ct \, \cosh \rho \; - \; x \, \sinh \rho \\ x' = - ct \, \sinh \rho \; + \; x \, \cosh \rho \\ y' = y \\ z' = z\)

    Or in the language of linear algebra and taking advantage of this being a linear relationship:
    \(\begin{pmatrix}c \Delta t' \\ \Delta x' \\ \Delta y' \\ \Delta z' \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \cosh \rho & - \sinh \rho & 0 & 0 \\ - \sinh \rho & \cosh \rho & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix}c \Delta t' \\ \Delta x' \\ \Delta y' \\ \Delta z' \end{pmatrix}\)

    Which preserves the invariant:
    \(c^2 (\Delta t')^2 - (\Delta x')^2 - (\Delta y')^2 - (\Delta z')^2 = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 \)

    Thus both these transforms of real coordinates to other real coordinates and both are consistent with the assumption of the that all coordinate systems agree if something is moving at the speed of light (in any direction).
    since in that case:
    \( c^2 (\Delta t')^2 = (\Delta x')^2 + (\Delta y')^2 + (\Delta z')^2 \) should require that \(c^2 (\Delta t)^2 = (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2\)
    which it does in this model since: \(c^2 (\Delta t')^2 - (\Delta x')^2 - (\Delta y')^2 - (\Delta z')^2 = c^2 (\Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 = 0\)
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    See topic.

    SRT at variance with both experiment so and common sense.

    Einstein made a stupid mistake.
    (Einstein mistakenly gave the absoluteness to the transverse scale and he referred visual effects - realistic.)
    You do not want to admit it.
    The time is still force you to do it.
    SRT противоречит как эксперименту, так и здравому смыслу.

    Эйнштейн сделал глупую ошибку.
    (Эйнштейн ошибочно наделил абсолютностью поперечные масштабы и визуальные эффекты принял за реальность.)
    Вы это не хотите признать.
    Но время всё равно заставит вас сделать это.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. rpenner Fully Wired Staff Member

    Untrue, as we have explained many times before without rebuttal from you. In physics, it is not enough to state your opinion, you must argue for your position and support it with evidence. The evidence is that there is a limiting speed for massive particles and the same speed as all massless phenomena that carry momentum and energy, \(c\). The evidence is that for a free particle: energy, momentum and velocity are related by \(E \vec{v} = c^2 \vec{p}\) and \(E^2 - \left( \vec{p} c \right)^2 = \left( mc^2 \right)^2\) and that experiments designed to compare the performance of this model to the Newtonian or Masterov model always favor (Special) Relativity.
    For a massless particle with non-zero momentum, these formulas claim the velocity is always \(c\): \( m = 0 \, \textrm{and} \, \vec{p} \neq 0 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \left| \vec{v} \right| = c\)
    For a massive particle, we can define \(\rho = \cosh^{\tiny -1} \frac{E}{m c^2}\) and immediately get: \(E = mc^2 \, \cosh \rho\), \(\left| \vec{p} \right| = mc \, \left| \sinh \rho \right|\), and \(\left| \vec{v} \right| = c \, \left| \tanh \rho \right|\)
    This in turn gives us the velocity composition law, supported by precision experiment since 1859, for velocities in the same direction: \( v_3 = v_1 \oplus v_2 = c \, \tanh ( \rho_1 + \rho_2 ) = c \, \tanh \left( \tanh^{\tiny -1} \frac{v_1}{c} \; + \; \tanh^{\tiny -1} \frac{v_2}{c} \right) = \frac{v_1 + v_2}{1 + \frac{v_1 v_2}{c^2}}\).

    And as for the topic that started this thread, the experimental design, analysis and choice of venue by Fan was inferior to the needs of modern scholarship.
    • Fan's choice of venue is clearly without peer review and is therefore inferior to any reputable scientific scholarship.
    • Fan's experimental design is inferior to Bertozzi's since there is no way to know the number of electrons which strike the target.
    • Fan's analysis is inferior to any objective standard of scholarship because his own data demonstrates the opposite conclusion that he comes to in his paper.

    So Fan's experiment, if not his paper, supports Special Relativity over Newton and over Fan's pet theory which Masterov also rejects.

    As Kepler, Galileo and Newton replaced Aristotelian descriptions of motion with accurate description of motion and empirical laws, it has been conclusively demonstrated that "common sense" is no substitute for rigorous mathematical models founded on empiricism.
    Christopher Hitchens wrote that a well-accepted principle of discussion is: "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
    Here, you have not only asserted your "principle" without evidence, but you have also never presented a model. Sometimes you say that your model is based on Galilean transforms and sometimes on Lorentz transforms. In neither case have you related your transform rule to an experimental situation. You say that your model only relates to "visual" coordinates, but don't derive them from the laws of electromagnetism which control what is seen. You ignore actual discussion of electromagnetism and calculations of "retarded coordinates" which differ greatly from Lorentz-transformed coordinates.

    When I wrote this post:
    I was trying to make these points:
    • If the speed of light is the same in any valid system of coordinates then for any two points in space time separated by a beam of light: \((c \Delta t)^2 = (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad (c \Delta t')^2 = (\Delta x')^2 - (\Delta y')^2 - (\Delta z')^2 \)
    • Because of the isotropy of space, if the speed of light is the same in any valid system of coordinates, and the direction of light and velocity difference between frames is parallel, then so is it in the other frame: \(\Delta y = 0 \; \textrm{and} \; \Delta z = 0 \; (c \Delta t)^2 = (\Delta x)^2 \; \textrm{and} \; \begin{pmatrix} * \\ * \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} = {\Large \Lambda} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 0 \\ 0 \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \quad \Rightarrow \Delta y' = 0 \; \textrm{and} \; \Delta z' = 0 \; (c \Delta t')^2 = (\Delta x')^2\)
    • Because of the nature of space as a manifold without natural orgin, position doesn't matter and thus the transform between valid coordinate systems is a linear operator.
    • Because the transform is a linear operator, then \((c \Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 - (\Delta y)^2 - (\Delta z)^2 = (c \Delta t')^2 - (\Delta x')^2 - (\Delta y')^2 - (\Delta z')^2\)
    • Because the transform is a linear operator, then for motion in one dimension\((c \Delta t)^2 - (\Delta x)^2 = (c \Delta t')^2 - (\Delta x')^2 \)
    • So for motion in one dimension (x), it follows that: \( (\Delta y)^2 + (\Delta z)^2 = (\Delta y')^2 +(\Delta z')^2\)

    Why? The evidence says your position is in the wrong and therefore is no reason for me to change my opinion.

  8. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Massively awesome analysis.
  9. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Here explores the visual effects.
    And the analysis have error.
    In this analysis (groundless) transverse scales are absolutely, and visual time (therefore) are relative.

    The energy in the analysis is not measured, but is calculated by formulas SRT.
    Ie, huge energy, which report creators Collider, there are only on paper.
    In calorimeters of these monstrous energy no exist.

    FAN's experiments clearly show that the relativistic growth of energy and of mass exists only in the minds of people who think that they understand the physics.

    According to SRT: energy is proportional to the potential difference of the accelerating field, and (according to SRT) energy of the relativistic particles continued to grow, while the speed of the particles is practically unchanged.
    FAN's experience has shown that the temperature of the calorimeter is not growing (along with the relativistic velocity).
    Ie, the experiment demonstrated fallacy SRT: the monstrous energies (of which are told to us) there are only on paper.
    In the calorimeter of these energies no exist.

    Здесь анализируются визуальные эффекты.
    Анализ содержит ошибку.
    В этом анализе безосновательно сделаны абсолютными поперечные масштабы, а визуальное время (поэтому) стало относительным.

    Энергия в анализе не измеряется, а вычисляется по формулам SRT.
    Т.е., огромные энергии, о которых рапортуют создатели Коллайдера, имеют место лишь на бумаге.
    В калориметрах от этих чудовищных энергий остаётся смехотворный пшик.

    Опыты Fan наглядно показывают, что релятивистский рост энергии и массы существует только в воображении людей, которые думают, что они понимают физику.

    Согласно SRT: энергия пропорциональна разности потенциалов ускоряющего поля, и (согласно SRT) энергия релятивистских частиц продолжает расти, в то время как скорость этих частиц практически не изменяется.
    Опыт FAN показал, что температура калориметра не растёт вместе с релятивистской скоростью.
    Т.е., эксперимент наглядно показал ошибочность SRT: чудовищные энергии, о которых нам сообщают, имеют место только на бумаге.
    В калориметре этих энергий нет.
  10. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Science (not only physics) expects a series of scandals.
    For example:

    1. Physicists are looking for water on Moon, while Moon have nothing but water.
    What we see on the moon - there is ice (covered with dust), and under this ice hundreds of kilometers of liquid water.

    2. It is generally believed that plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, while plants absorb carbon dioxide from the soil, by roots, along with the water in which this gas is dissolved.
    To see this, it is enough to water houseplants by carbonated (carbon dioxide) water.
    This discovery will give humanity an abundance of cheap food.

    Both of these discoveries do not require the knowledge possessed by scientists.
    Students are able to make such discoveries.
    These discoveries clear show presence of the crisis of science.
    The crisis is the result of occupation scientific research institutions by Zionist gangs, which (together scientists) decide what are scientific knowledges, and what are - no.
    Zionists have turned science into an ordinary religious sect, that are the cause of the crisis.

    I will show (later) an example that demonstrates the crisis in mathematics.
    (It is generally believed that an analysis of a non-linear models are very difficult.
    I will show that the analysis of nonlinear models is easier than analysis of linear models.)


    Íàóêó (íå òîëüêî ôèçèêó) îæèäàåò ñåðèÿ ñêàíäàëîâ.

    1. Ôèçèêè èùóò âîäó íà Ëóíå, â òî âðåìÿ êàê íà ëóíå ïî÷òè íè÷åãî íåò, êðîìå âîäû.
    Òî, ÷òî ìû âèäèì íà Ëóíå, åñòü ë¸ä (ïîêðûòûé ïûëüþ), à ïîä ýòèì ëþäîì åù¸ ñîòíè êèëîìåòðîâ æèäêîé âîäû.

    2. Ïðèíÿòî äóìàòü, ÷òî ðàñòåíèÿ ïîòðåáëÿþò óãëåêèñëûé ãàç èç àòìîñôåðû, â òî âðåìÿ êàê óãëåêèñëûé ãàç ðàñòåíèÿìè ïîòðåáëÿåòñÿ èç ïî÷âû, êîðíÿìè, âìåñòå ñ âîäîé, â êîòîðîé ãàç ýòîò ðàñòâîð¸í.
    ×òîáû óáåäèòüñÿ â ýòîì, äîñòàòî÷íî ïîëèâàòü êîìíàòíûå ðàñòåíèÿ ãàçèðîâàííîé (óãëåêèñëûì ãàçîì) âîäîé.
    Ýòî îòêðûòèå äàñò ÷åëîâå÷åñòâó èçîáèëèå íåäîðîãîé åäû.

    Îáà ýòè îòêðûòèÿ íå òðåáóþò çíàíèé, êîòîðûìè îáëàäàþò ó÷¸íûå.
    øêîëüíèêè ñïîñîáíû ñäåëàòü ïîäîáíûå îòêðûòèÿ.
    Ýòè îòêðûòèÿ íàãëÿäíåéøèì îáðàçîì äåìîíñòðèðóþò êðèçèñ íàóêè.
    Êðèçèñ íàóêè ÿâëÿåòñÿ ñëåäñòâèåì îêêóïàöèè íàó÷íûõ ó÷ðåæäåíèé áàíäàìè ñèîíèñòîâ, êîòîðûå (âìåñòî ó÷¸íûõ) ðåøàþò, ÷òî ÿâëÿåòñÿ íàó÷íûìè çíàíèÿìè, à ÷òî òàêîâûìè íå ÿâëÿåòñÿ.
    Ñèîíèñòû ïðåâðàòèëè íàóêó â çàóðÿäíóþ ðåëèãèîçíóþ ñåêòó, ÷òî è ñòàëî ïðè÷èíîé êðèçèñà.

    ß ïðèâåäó (ïîçæå) ïðèìåð, êîòîðûé äåìîíñòðèðóåò êðèçèñ â ìàòåìàòèêå.
    (Ïðèíÿòî äóìàòü, ÷òî èññëåäîâàòü íåëèíåéíûå ìîäåëè î÷åíü ñëîæíî.
    ß ïîêàæó, ÷òî àíàëèç íåëèíåéíûõ ìîäåëåé ïðîùå, ÷åì àíàëèç ëèíåéíûõ ìîäåëåé.)
  11. brucep Valued Senior Member

    It doesn't have an error. Why don't you answer rpenner? I find it hard to believe you actually said this " Relativism is an optical effect. No more." To keep from practicing Stupidism, IE disrespecting the rights of people to be stupid and remain so indefinitely, I'll end my comment now.
  12. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    I gave the answer: rpenner says about visual effects, so as if these effects are real.

    For example: the relativistic change in the size of the objects have the same (optical) nature of visible change a dimensions of objects, if you change the distance to them.

    Я давал ответ: rpenner говорит о визуальных эффектах так, будто эти эффекты являются реальностью.

    Для примера: релятивистское изменение размеров объектов имеет ту же (оптическую) природу, которую имеет изменение видимых размеров объектов, при изменение расстояния до них.
  13. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    The absence of a relativistic energy growth (which FAN shows) clearly points to the fact that the limitation on the speed of particle (in accelerators) is the result of decrease in the Coulomb force, but not the increase in the mass of relativistic particles.
    Hence: relativistic particles cease to interact with the electromagnetic wave when the speed of the particles (relative to the source of field) approaches the speed of light.
    If the speed of the matter (relative to the source of field) is greater than the speed of light, then this matter is no longer interact with the field.
    This matter is called neutrinos and "dark matter".

    Отсутствие релятивистского роста энергии, который демонстрирует FAN, однозначно указывает на то, что ограничение на скорость ускоряемых (в ускорителях) частиц является следствием уменьшение силы Кулона, а вовсе не ростом массы релятивистских частиц.
    Следовательно: релятивистские частицы перестают взаимодействовать с ЭМВ, если скорость частиц (относительно источника поля) приближается к скорости света.
    Если скорость материи (относительно источника поля) превышает скорость света, то такая материя перестаёт взаимодействовать с полем.
    Такую материю принято называть нейтрино и "тёмная материя".
  14. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    For a while I (probably) will be out.
    (I'll going to go to a hospital.)
  15. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Medicine in Russia is free, but we have no medicine (name only exist).
  16. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Science and religion accumulate (storage) human knowledge.

    The difference is that exist ban for the criticism of religion knowledge. Revisionism prohibited in religion .
    Religious fanatic has truth already, because he did not want other knowledge.
    Religious knowledge can not evolve.

    Revisionism (criticism of scientific theories) in science is compulsory process.
    The evolution of knowledge is not possible without the Revisionism.

    All knowledge of science is not TRUTH, even if confirmed experimentally.
    Scientists does not know TRUTH, and never to own will it.
    Scientists can only strive for TRUTH, but he had never been reached.
    The path to TRUTH has no end.

    Zionist religious sect (that occupied academic institutions around the world) canceled revisionism in science, thereby transforming science into a religious sect.
    The ban on criticism SRT is only one (private) case, which clearly demonstrates the fact that science becomes a religious sect.

    That occupation science by cultists caused a deep crisis of science.
    Unfortunate consequences of the crisis I demonstrated throughout this topic.
    I am far from being able to exhaust all such examples.

    For the construction of LHC have been spent tens of billions of euros.
    This is a lot of money.
    But the expected experimental results do not, and should not be expected it.
    Experimental results will not be obtained, since SRT lying.

    Zionists do have imposed on us is a lie as TRUTH.
    The crisis in science are not finish, if the Zionists will be decide for us what is scientific knowledge, and what is not.
    Наука и религия являются аккумуляторами знаний человечества.
    Разница заключается в том, что в религии знания являются истиной, критика которых запрещена. В религии запрещён ревизионизм.
    Религиозный фанатик истиной уже обладает, а потому ему не нужны другие знания.
    Религиозные знания не способны эволюционировать.

    Ревизионизм (критика научных теорий) в науке является обязательным процессом.
    Без ревизионизма невозможна эволюция знаний.

    В науке знания истиной не являются, даже если подтверждаются экспериментально.
    Учёный истиной не владеет, и никогда владеть не будет.
    Учёный может лишь стремиться к истине, но он никогда её не достигнет.
    Путь к истине не имеет конца.

    Религиозная секта сионистов, которая оккупировала научные учреждения по всему миру, отменила ревизионизм в науке, превратив тем самым науку в религиозную секту.
    Запрет на критику srt является лишь одним (частным) случаем, который наглядно демонстрирует факт превращения науки в религиозную секту.

    Именно оккупация науки сектантами стала причиной глубокого кризиса науки.
    Печальные последствия кризиса я демонстрировал на протяжении всей этой темы.
    Я далёк от того, чтобы исчерпать все такие примеры.

    На строительство БАК были потрачены десятки миллиардов евро.
    Это очень большие деньги.
    Но ожидаемых экспериментальных результатов нет, и их не следует ожидать.
    Экспериментальных результатов не будет получено, поскольку srt лжет.
    Сионисты навязывают нам это враньё в качестве истины уже сто.
    Кризис в науке не закончится, если сионисты будут за нас решать то, что является научным знанием, а что таковым не является.
  17. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Ah, you're back, and all guns blazing. Good to see you are well enough to maintain your rage. I hope you stay well.

    Masterov, I'm in my 50's - probably around the same age as you. Now, I've been hugely successful in my life, and in recent years, I've come to undertand two very poignant things about knowledge, belief, etc.

    1) All knowledge is provisional

    2) All things tend to their opposite

    I don't think science says that the knowledge it has currently is absolute. I think it says that it is the best it has - for the moment. I have little doubt that in decades to come, perhaps even in my lifetime, new ideas will abound and be considered real - different to todays, so much as to make our present ideas akin to the flat earth. That's the way it goes.

    I still shake my head at your ongoing obsession with Zionists, Jews, etc. I'm not Jewish, nor any defender of same.

    But isn't all knowledge provisional ? Did you expect the absolute ?

    Of course the most powerful, the most capapble, are going to propagate theirs.

    A while back, you posted some posts / photo of you as a child in your home country.

    You know, my father died at 92. His father (my grandfather) died at 94. He, my grandfather, was smack bang in the middle of latter days of Ottoman. You must know about the Ottoman Empire, Masterov. For 400 years or more they ruled, subjucated, brutalized your and my ancestors. As best possible they eliminated Greek, Eastern, Russian Orthodox people, particularly at the hint of any sign of resistance. I have some old grainy photographs, passed down to me by my grandfather, of the 'mountain of heads'. Do you know WHAT, and WHY that was ?

    My grandfather was an active proponant in the overthrow of the Ottomans circa 1915's - he was a member of the "krypho scholeo" (secret school) an underground resistance organisation that existed for over one hundred years, and whose principle objectives were to preserve Orthodoxy, overthrow the Ottomans, and restore freedom.

    Consider yourself lucky they were overthrown, else, your head (and possibly mine) would make it to that mountain.
  18. origin Trump is the best argument against a democracy. Valued Senior Member

    Your ideas are crap. Many people on this forum have proven it. You can't stand the truth that your ideas and work are just plain stupid. So what do you do? Blame the jews! What a freaking idiot. It is hard to feel sorry for such a sorry excuse of a person.....
  19. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Please note that in my text there is no word "jew".

    I talked about Zionists only (Nazis Jewish).

    The difference between a Zionists and a Jews is the same as - between fascists and Germans.

    Not every German is a fascist, but every fascist - German.
    Not every Jew is a Zionist, but every Zionist - Jewish.

    Why do you accuse me in what I never did?
    Обратите внимание на то, что в моём тексте нет слова "jew".

    Я говорил о сионистах (о нацистах еврейской национальности).

    Разница между сионистом и евреем такая же, как – между фашистом и немцем.

    Не каждый немец является фашистом, но каждый фашист – немец.
    Не каждый еврей является сионистом, но каждый сионист – еврей.

    Я прошу меня не обвинять в том, что я не делал.
  20. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    For example: the relativistic change in the size of the objects have the same (optical) nature of visible change a dimensions of objects, if you change the distance to them.

    Interesting. Others, in past posts a while back here, tried to explain relativity to me, using analogies right along these lines.

    About your continued remonstrations against Zionists, etc, suppressing scientific progress, I wonder - do you know of any interests or concerns present or past, that have promulgated altruistic theories, free of self interest ?

    I personally can't think of any.

    edit - changed 2nd last paragraph slightly
  21. Prof.Layman totally internally reflected Registered Senior Member

    I don't think a ship flying by Earth could fry us to death by observing us traveling close to the speed of light. I think part of this pet theory of change in temperture at relative velocity was brought on by thinking about how or why a clock actually slows down. The explanation is that the atoms of the object would move a greater distance so then the mechanics of the clock would then have to travel further. The parts moving a greater distance then take longer to measure time, so then this would cause an increase in tempurature. I don't think this assumption is correct because the atoms themselves would be moving uniformely together so then they themselves would not detect an increase in tempurature. I don't think observing an increase in tempurature is vital to the theory. I don't even think the real reason why time is seen to slow down is even caused by motions having to travel a greater distance.

    I think that time slows down relative to another observer because they measure the beam in the light clock to travel a shorter distance. On the ship, they only see the beam to travel straight up and down, perpendicular to the direction of motion. They would then have to experience less time in order to measure the same speed of light. Less distance, less time allowed for the journey in order to measure the same velocity. Seeing the beam travel a larger distance would allow for more time to pass by for light to travel a longer trip or journey.

    So then it would as though time actually warps inorder to change what we measure as the speed of light, and not the increase of motions seen from an outside observer. I think that kind of results from an experiment would help support this interpretation of the theory.
  22. Masterov Registered Senior Member

    Relativistic change in the size of the objects have optical nature of visible change a dimensions of objects, just as into change the distance to them.
    The physical dimensions of objects are absolute and they are independent from acrobatic tricks of the observer.
  23. Prof.Layman totally internally reflected Registered Senior Member

    Then how do all object measure the same speed for light? If I was to throw a ball on a train, the person on the train would measure it to travel one speed, and someone not on the train would see it travel another speed. The ball will be seen to travel at two different speeds! So then how could they both see the ball to travel at the same speed if it is just a visible change? It is not just a visible change because they both measure light to travel at the same speed! It is not just like looking at a ball being thrown down a train. Something has to be going on in order for two objects traveling at different speeds to always measure something travel the same speed, no matter what speed they may be moving!

Share This Page