Of course, mods can do this without leaving that marker. I swear, every time I look at one on tinitus' posts, it's different.
but none of my posts are significant, so it doesnt matter much, right
it is probably the only advantage I have as moderator
and yes, I use it, to avoid misunderstanding
and with responsibility, I would say
I have never edited a post if it interacts with a responding post, never
but if its a moderating post
, yes I can do that too
John, John, John...
My post was edited to my satisfaction before I read your response. I would expect you to be suspicious of my motives...as you (may) think like that... Keep your eye on it. I may go back and edit it again.
I learned sometime ago that the worst lies I told were the ones I believed...and defended diligently. They hurt the people around me. It hurt to admit to myself they were no good. A total waste feeding my ego.
Peace to you John.
My post was edited to my satisfaction before I read your response. I would expect you to be suspicious of my motives...as you (may) think like that...
Keep your eye on it. I may go back and edit it again. I learned sometime ago that the worst lies I told were the ones I believed...and defended diligently. They hurt the people around me. It hurt to admit to myself they were no good. A total waste feeding my ego.
Peace to you John.
How to make dull people write interesting posts:
1 - Brain transplant.
2 - ..............run out of ideas. Hey, I may need one.
How to make people understand the genius inside MJL21193:
1. Electroshock therapy.
2. Again, I'm running out of ideas. Need more time to ponder about the complexity.......Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
1 - Brain transplant.
2 - ..............run out of ideas. Hey, I may need one.
How to make people understand the genius inside MJL21193:
1. Electroshock therapy.
2. Again, I'm running out of ideas. Need more time to ponder about the complexity.......Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
but none of my posts are significant, so it doesnt matter much, right
Well, I was thinking that but found it rude to directly verbalize it. Thanks for clearing the room.
Einstein's simultaneity theory is impossible
Einstein claims events may be simultaneous in one frame of reference relative to one observer and not simultaneous to another observer. This is supposed to follow from the belief that the speed of light is always constant.
Read about The train-and-platform thought experiment here: Relativity of simultaneity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Now add to this two stop watches, one at each end of the train car, ie. front and back. Have electronic circuits arranged to stop each stop watch when it senses a photon hitting the wall of the train car (ie. using a photocell). Start each stop watch while the train car is at rest relative to the observer on the outside of the train car, start the train car and do the experiment as described. After the experiment, stop the train car and bring the two observers and the two stop watches together. If the observers saw the photons hitting the front and back of the train car at different times during the experiment (when the train car was in motion relative to the outside observer), then they should both see different times on the stop watches, after the experiment even while both observers and both stop watches are in the same frame of reference. Yes, according to Einstein, two people can see different readings on the same clock and yet at the same time Einstein says this is impossible. Remember in the twin paradox the dodge used by the Einsteinian mystics to get assymetric time dilation. The twin that is accelerated is supposed to be the twin that undergoes time dilation.
You can use stopwatches to show events are always simultaneous to all observers anywhere showing that an instant in time is the same instant in time everywhere. This also shows that the speed of light is NOT constant.
Einstein claims events may be simultaneous in one frame of reference relative to one observer and not simultaneous to another observer. This is supposed to follow from the belief that the speed of light is always constant.
Read about The train-and-platform thought experiment here: Relativity of simultaneity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Now add to this two stop watches, one at each end of the train car, ie. front and back. Have electronic circuits arranged to stop each stop watch when it senses a photon hitting the wall of the train car (ie. using a photocell). Start each stop watch while the train car is at rest relative to the observer on the outside of the train car, start the train car and do the experiment as described. After the experiment, stop the train car and bring the two observers and the two stop watches together. If the observers saw the photons hitting the front and back of the train car at different times during the experiment (when the train car was in motion relative to the outside observer), then they should both see different times on the stop watches, after the experiment even while both observers and both stop watches are in the same frame of reference. Yes, according to Einstein, two people can see different readings on the same clock and yet at the same time Einstein says this is impossible. Remember in the twin paradox the dodge used by the Einsteinian mystics to get assymetric time dilation. The twin that is accelerated is supposed to be the twin that undergoes time dilation.
You can use stopwatches to show events are always simultaneous to all observers anywhere showing that an instant in time is the same instant in time everywhere. This also shows that the speed of light is NOT constant.
The often repeated mistake is the obviously wrong assumption that aether drift experiments detect some sort of absolute velocity when absolute velocity and absolute rest have never been defined, but unfortunately remains part of the smoke and mirrors and slight of hand used by confusionists who promote their arrogant religion of relativity. Instead, we could consider the aether as being separate from space and has its own frame of reference, ie. there is a prefered electromagnetic frame of reference.
Do your homework now, children, or you will continue to be dangerous to society.
Anti-Relativity.com • View topic - Lorentz, aether and absolute rest
Strangely enough, even some critics of Einstein assume aether drift experiments measure/detect absolute motion.
[0910.5658] Physical interpretation of the fringe shift measured on Michelson interferometer in optical media
Paper in Physics Letters A reports detection of absolute motion
You can see some brainwashed fools posting their inflammatory comments to this article, too.
http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2005/PP-03-04.PDF
Re: Cahill's Michelson-Morley data as broken boost vacuum symmetry
Lubos Motl ET String Theorist? and Cahill's challenge to Einstein
Inquiry about a possible falsification of Special Relativity
Do your homework now, children, or you will continue to be dangerous to society.
Anti-Relativity.com • View topic - Lorentz, aether and absolute rest
Strangely enough, even some critics of Einstein assume aether drift experiments measure/detect absolute motion.
[0910.5658] Physical interpretation of the fringe shift measured on Michelson interferometer in optical media
Paper in Physics Letters A reports detection of absolute motion
You can see some brainwashed fools posting their inflammatory comments to this article, too.
http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2005/PP-03-04.PDF
Re: Cahill's Michelson-Morley data as broken boost vacuum symmetry
Lubos Motl ET String Theorist?
and Cahill's challenge to EinsteinInquiry about a possible falsification of Special Relativity
Last edited:
Look at this article.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/24/2063601/physics/AmJPhys1967-p817-819.pdf
Stellar aberration experiments with binary stars supports the Lorentz aether theory or the Larmor-Lorentz theory as Herbert Ives calls it, but proves SRT is incorrect. Note on page 818 in column 1 the paragraph:
This says that there would be no paradox in the aether theory, ie. if there was a prefered electromagnetic frame of reference, not to be confused with an absolute Newtonian frame of reference. The author uses a similar dodge used to explain the twin paradox. He explains that the change in the motion of the earth mysteriously makes it look like the earth is moving through the transmitting medium of light, but still doesn't believe it exists.
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/24/2063601/physics/AmJPhys1967-p817-819.pdf
Stellar aberration experiments with binary stars supports the Lorentz aether theory or the Larmor-Lorentz theory as Herbert Ives calls it, but proves SRT is incorrect. Note on page 818 in column 1 the paragraph:
This says that there would be no paradox in the aether theory, ie. if there was a prefered electromagnetic frame of reference, not to be confused with an absolute Newtonian frame of reference. The author uses a similar dodge used to explain the twin paradox. He explains that the change in the motion of the earth mysteriously makes it look like the earth is moving through the transmitting medium of light, but still doesn't believe it exists.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.