0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Do you want to be more clever than Einstein?This is possible.
Being cleverer than a corpse is not a big challenge.
If Einstein would be alive, he could understand his mistake and accept this explanation.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 21/07/2019 18:27:31If Einstein would be alive, he could understand his mistake and accept this explanation. What mistake? You haven't pointed out any mistakes that Einstein made. I have no doubt that he would have known about the things you mentioned in the OP. I can't figure out what it is that you are trying to argue.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 21/07/2019 18:27:31If Einstein would be alive, he could understand his mistake and accept this explanation.I suspect that, if he was still with us, he would be embarrassed for you.He would be aware that every single test of his ideas had shown that he was right.In some cases that means he's right to about a dozen significant figures.What evidence do you have that he is anything other than "correct as far as we can tell"/
However they can break prejudices and memorizations
We didn't ask for pictures.We asked for evidence.Do you have any evidence that indicates that GR is actually wrong?
Quote from: Bored chemist on 22/07/2019 16:07:00We didn't ask for pictures.We asked for evidence.Do you have any evidence that indicates that GR is actually wrong?https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332902408_An_Experiment_for_Lorentz_-Fitzgerald_Contraction
Whereas the 'c' velocity of photon is universal speed of light according to space.
The source can go anywhere freely from this point after emitting.
do you have any meaningful evidence to show that GR is wrong?
My message was about SR.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 23/07/2019 12:32:35Gravitational lens are a reality.However, in my opinion, if there is no acceleration, the light bends again with the same logic; please see the attached figure.For the second time you put out an example that suggests a violation of Galilean principle of relativity. You have two 'cabinets' (the ones on the left and right), neither accelerating, and being considered in a frame where V is 0 on the left one and V is nonzero on the right, and they get a different result.If the same boxes were to be considered in a frame where the one on the right is the stationary one, then the different result means there is an experiment that can be done to determine which of the two boxes is actually moving, which violates principle of relativity.So your assertion is once again falsified, and you're not being anywhere near as clever as Einstein. Neither am I, but I'm at least clever enough to see the flaw in your drawing.
Gravitational lens are a reality.However, in my opinion, if there is no acceleration, the light bends again with the same logic; please see the attached figure.
Quote from: xersanozgen on 23/07/2019 12:32:35My message was about SR.OK, do you have any evidence that SR is wrong, other than the known issues with SR to which GR is the solution?i.e. do you know of any evidence that SR fails when considering zero-gravity, non-accelerated systems?
The explanation about "types of relativity" is sufficient evidence.
But this habitual opinion is not valid for light.