View Single Post
  #1  
Old September 9th 08, 03:07 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique,sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Michelson and Morley experiment

On Sep 9, 2:27*pm, PD wrote in
sci.physics.relativity:
On Sep 9, 1:01*am, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 17:59:44 -0700 (PDT), PD wrote:
On Sep 8, 7:56*pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:


If anyone tries to measure the properties of a moving object or clock and finds
them to be different from those measured at rest then the experimental method
is obviously flawed.


In other words, if an experiment shows evidence of something that is
contrary to your expectations, then something is wrong with the
experiment. This coming from someone "born with a scientific mind".


Even your own colleagues....the less ignorant ones....agree that nothing
actually happens to a clock or rod as a result of a speed change.


Actually, what's agreed upon is that the physical property does in
fact change, but that no physical process occurs to the object to
change the property. You find it difficult to imagine how one can
happen without the other.


But, Clever Draper, that is a very specific zombie imagination
acquired after years of singing ("Divine Einstein", "Yes we all
believe in relativity, relativity, relativity" etc.) accompanied by
energetic convulsions. How can you expect a person who has never taken
part in all those worships to imagine "that the physical property does
in fact change, but that no physical process occurs to the object to
change the property"? Be condescending, Clever Draper!

Pentcho Valev