The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. That CAN'T be true!
  4. Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.

  • 3 Replies
  • 3667 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Atkhenaken (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 156
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 5 times
Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.
« on: 11/09/2016 06:47:50 »
The Hafele–Keating experiment clearly shows that there is an aether which causes the clocks to slow down or speed up due to aetheric pressure and wind and has nothing to do with Einsteins's relativity theory.

MOD EDIT: This is a new theory, please discuss in the appropriate part of the forum
« Last Edit: 11/09/2016 08:53:49 by Colin2B »
Logged
 



Offline Atkhenaken (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 156
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.
« Reply #1 on: 11/09/2016 12:11:20 »
I have reintroduced an OLD THEORY. I have not introduced a "NEW THEORY". Thus, the reason for moving my reply the the official 'site dungeon' is a non sequitur. The experiment clearly states that the both aircraft were travelling a exactly the same velocity. For relativity theory to be correct; it would require some time dilation to occur. But, for time dilation, you need one of the craft to be travelling faster than the other craft. This wasn't the case. Thus, relativity can't be used as the reason for the time difference. Thus, a spinning aether is the only other possible explanation. Note - You can't bury the truth that easily!
Logged
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 6476
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 708 times
Re: Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.
« Reply #2 on: 11/09/2016 14:08:19 »
Quote from: Atkhenaken on 11/09/2016 12:11:20
You can't bury the truth that easily!
You are the one trying to bury the truth.
Logged
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.
 

Offline Atkhenaken (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 156
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: Archaic ideas pre constant light speed theory.
« Reply #3 on: 11/09/2016 14:30:40 »
My ideas can't be both archaic and new? Make up your mind which one first. Relativity can't be used to explain why there was a time difference in the two planes which went in two different directions. Relativity requires that one of the planes was flying faster than the other to justify Einstein's time dilation theory. But, the experiment clearly states that both planes traveled at the exact same speed. Thus, you will be forced to come up with some other explanation other than relativity. Note - There is no scientific proof of a space /time continuum either. Yet, I am sure you accept its existence.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.164 seconds with 31 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.