0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Centra on Today at 06:54:23Relativity isn't the only thing that provides an explanation for the results.You keep saying that, and when I ask you what else might explain it, you don't answer.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 21/01/2022 08:46:51Quote from: Centra on Today at 06:54:23Relativity isn't the only thing that provides an explanation for the results.You keep saying that, and when I ask you what else might explain it, you don't answer.You can't use Google? https://physics.bg/home/physics-problems/speed-of-light-constancy/
You can't use Google? https://physics.bg/home/physics-problems/speed-of-light-constancy/
That nonsense you cited says this"It becomes clear from this law that the space is stationary – that means “the vacuum is stationary”. "How can that be?We already talked about a vacuum chamber on a plane.So, all you have done is advertised that you can't recognise bullshit when you see it.
Me replying is just keeping the pointlessness going.
That site I posted the link to a couple posts back is really very informative, I think people should read it.
I think people should read it.
Experiments have been done since the Michelson-Morley one and to much greater precision. They support light having a constant speed in all reference frames.
5. Conclusion The travel-time difference of two counter-propagating light beams in moving fiber is proportional to both the total length and the speed of the fiber, regardless of whether the motion is circular or uniform. In a segment of uniformly moving fiber with a speed of v and a length of Δl, the travel-time difference is 2vΔl/c2. Modified Sagnac experiment for measuring travel-time difference between counter-propagating light beams in a uniformly moving fiber Ruyong Wang a, Yi Zhengb,*, Aiping Yaob, Dean Langley c
“The chief attraction of the theory lies in its logical completeness. If a single one of the conclusions drawn from it proves wrong, it must be given up; to modify it without destroying the whole structure seems to be impossible.”
“If the results of the Miller experiments were to be confirmed, then relativity theory could not be maintained, since the experiments would then prove that, relative to the coordinate systems of the appropriate state of motion (the Earth), the velocity of light in a vacuum would depend upon the direction of motion. With this, the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which forms one of the two foundation pillars on which the theory is based, would be refuted.” (Einstein, 1926).
That's exactly what the experiment quoted above proved, that the velocity of light in a vacuum (the inside of an optic fiber) depends upon the direction of motion relative
Einstein's theory of relativity, thus, had one of its two foundation pillars pulled out from under it in the year 2003, 98 years after its publication.
5. Conclusion The LT equations are shown to be merely applicable for events satisfying the basic light speed constancy equations x = ct and x′ = ct′. The erroneous application of the LT on co-local events (x′ = 0; t′ > 0, in K′, or x = 0; t > 0, in K), or simultaneous events (t′ = 0; x′ ≠ 0, in K′, or t = 0; x ≠ 0, in K), is shown to result in mathematical contradictions and invalid predictions of time dilation, or length contraction, respectively. Critical Error in the Formulation of the Special Relativity Radwan M. Kassir*
Quote from: Centra on 22/01/2022 12:35:19That's exactly what the experiment quoted above proved, that the velocity of light in a vacuum (the inside of an optic fiber) depends upon the direction of motion relativeThe inside of a fiber optic cable is glass, not a vacuum and the speed of light is the same in all inertial frames. Your ignorance and your pseudoscience sites don't change that.
How the Special Relativity Violates Fundamental Physics ConceptsRadwan M. Kassir ©firstname.lastname@example.orgAbstract In this paper, it is shown that the classical addition of velocities is unavoidable, and follows naturally from an intrinsic physics concept. It is revealed that the relativistic addition of velocities and the Lorentz contraction simply lead to time transformations contradicting the Special Relativity predictions. Ironically, the Special Relativity time dilation prediction could be obtained from the classical addition of velocities and the Lorentz contraction, when the travel time of a two-way light trip is considered. A one-way (forward or backward) travel time leads to contradictions with the Special Relativity predictions. The special relativity time dilation factor could be obtained from the classical addition of velocities for a light trip in the transverse direction, but in contradiction with the speed of light postulate. Analyzed light travel time between relatively moving frame origins offers outcomes inconsistent with the Special Relativity.
The entire edifice has collapsed into a pile of rubble,
the Lorentz Transformation was proven to be fatally flawed.
The gravitational theories may be valid, I don't know at the moment,
People who disagree with reality get called lots of things, but "scientist" isn't one of them.
Really, if that's all you have, is it worth posting?
And I disagree with you (obviously). I think it is worth posting. I think that just pointing out where someone has said something utterly stupid is valuable.
It forces them to consider the question of why they believe it.
And it avoids the potential issue of him thinking it's our job to provide the evidence whereas, since he's the one making the extraordinary claim, he has to provide the extraordinary evidence.