If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. 


Thread Tools  Display Modes 
#1




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
Bill Hobba wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
"Pentcho Valev" wrote: Roberts Roberts a few years ago you discovered that, even if "light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform", "SR would be unaffected": Tom did not discover that  it is a simple consequence of the fact light can be modelled by, for example, the Proca equations, with a very small mass instead of the usual one, and be in agreement with all current evidence, provided the mass is taken as small enough. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...c5ec387a7e789? Tom Roberts: "if it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains of applicability would be reduced)." I thought initially JeanMarc LevyLeblond discovered that, even if "light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform", "SR would be unaffected": http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." Are time dilation and length contraction "derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity"? More questions could be asked but neither Tom Roberts nor JeanMarc LevyLeblond nor any other hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult would ever answer. Only bellicose zombies will continue to defend "special relativity based on the light postulate", "special relativity without the light postulate" and, if necessary, "special relativity both with and without the light postulate". Pentcho Valev 
Ads 
#2




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
On Jun 16, 1:50 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Bill Hobba wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "Pentcho Valev" wrote: Roberts Roberts a few years ago you discovered that, even if "light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform", "SR would be unaffected": Tom did not discover that  it is a simple consequence of the fact light can be modelled by, for example, the Proca equations, with a very small mass instead of the usual one, and be in agreement with all current evidence, provided the mass is taken as small enough. http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...rowse_frm/thre... Tom Roberts: "if it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains of applicability would be reduced)." I thought initially JeanMarc LevyLeblond discovered that, even if "light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform", "SR would be unaffected": http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." Are time dilation and length contraction "derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity"? More questions could be asked but neither Tom Roberts nor JeanMarc LevyLeblond nor any other hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult would ever answer. Only bellicose zombies will continue to defend "special relativity based on the light postulate", "special relativity without the light postulate" and, if necessary, "special relativity both with and without the light postulate". Pentcho Valev Hide quoted text   Show quoted text  If all that surrounded you suddenly was in motion through time at a much slower rate, then you may see a baseball passing by you at an incredibly slow speed. If you try to alter its path of motion, it will take a large amount of energy to do so. It will give the appearance as though the baseball's mass is much larger than expected. If a baseball was in motion across space at a high velocity, it would also be in motion across time at a slower rate since clocks a ticking at a slower pace in its new frame. Here to if one tried to alter its path of motion it would seem as though its mass had increased due to its slow motion across time. All matter is constantly in motion in SpaceTime. The only change that can occur is the change of direction of travel in SpaceTime. If a meson is at rest in space, then its constant motion is now confined to being across Time only. If the meson then breaks down and splits into two photons, then these photons will fly apart from each other, and each will travel across space at the speed of light. However, since the meson was in motion across the dimension of Time, the photons too are also still flying across the dimension of Time even though they also are in motion across space. As the result of this, there is no simulation of an increase in mass of each of these photons even though they travel across space at the speed of light. 
#3




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the
Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper bound on the speed of propagation of information." So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the deduction. Pentcho Valev 
#4




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ups.com... : An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the : Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active : hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? : Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of : the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, : I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's : second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable : postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper : bound on the speed of propagation of information." : : So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now : be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed : of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the : deduction. : : Pentcho Valev What Humpty Roberts likes isn't relevant to physics. Einstein's time postulate is : the time required by light to travel from A to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A, which is disproven by the Cassini probe to Saturn. That's a fact whether Humpty Roberts agrees, disagrees, likes or doesn't like it. 
#5




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
Androcles wrote: "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ups.com... : An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the : Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active : hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? : Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of : the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, : I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's : second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable : postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper : bound on the speed of propagation of information." : : So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now : be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed : of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the : deduction. : : Pentcho Valev What Humpty Roberts likes isn't relevant to physics. Einstein's time postulate is : the time required by light to travel from A to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A, which is disproven by the Cassini probe to Saturn. That's a fact whether Humpty Roberts agrees, disagrees, likes or doesn't like it. I suspect hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult like Tom Roberts think of themselves in the following way: "I am destroying human rationality and the grateful humanity pays me for that. Could there be a more convincing proof that I am great? No." Pentcho Valev 
#6




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message oups.com... : : Androcles wrote: : "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message : ups.com... : : An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the : : Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active : : hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: : : : : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? : : Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of : : the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, : : I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's : : second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable : : postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper : : bound on the speed of propagation of information." : : : : So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now : : be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed : : of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the : : deduction. : : : : Pentcho Valev : : What Humpty Roberts likes isn't relevant to physics. : Einstein's time postulate is : the time required by light to travel from A : to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A, which is disproven : by the Cassini probe to Saturn. : That's a fact whether Humpty Roberts agrees, disagrees, likes or doesn't : like it. : : I suspect hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult like Tom Roberts think : of themselves in the following way: "I am destroying human rationality : and the grateful humanity pays me for that. Could there be a more : convincing proof that I am great? No." : : Pentcho Valev : Actually he and Lucent Technologies parted company some time ago, I'm sure they were tired of his rantings whilst on company time. The real criminals are lurking hidden in wackypedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ity#Postulates where it is impossible to bring to the attention of the public what Einstein's third postulate actually says, and such persuasive rhetoric such as "the power of Einstein's argument" is carefully employed. If you attempt to amend wackypedia to the truth then Ed Schaffer, self appointed wackypedia censor and editor, will not permit it. 
#7




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
Androcles wrote: "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message oups.com... : : Androcles wrote: : "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message : ups.com... : : An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the : : Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active : : hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: : : : : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? : : Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of : : the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, : : I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's : : second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable : : postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper : : bound on the speed of propagation of information." : : : : So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now : : be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed : : of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the : : deduction. : : : : Pentcho Valev : : What Humpty Roberts likes isn't relevant to physics. : Einstein's time postulate is : the time required by light to travel from A : to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A, which is disproven : by the Cassini probe to Saturn. : That's a fact whether Humpty Roberts agrees, disagrees, likes or doesn't : like it. : : I suspect hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult like Tom Roberts think : of themselves in the following way: "I am destroying human rationality : and the grateful humanity pays me for that. Could there be a more : convincing proof that I am great? No." : : Pentcho Valev : Actually he and Lucent Technologies parted company some time ago, I'm sure they were tired of his rantings whilst on company time. The real criminals are lurking hidden in wackypedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ity#Postulates where it is impossible to bring to the attention of the public what Einstein's third postulate actually says, and such persuasive rhetoric such as "the power of Einstein's argument" is carefully employed. If you attempt to amend wackypedia to the truth then Ed Schaffer, self appointed wackypedia censor and editor, will not permit it. At least criminals in Wikipedia are straightforward  the speed of light is constant and that's it. Relativists like Tom Roberts and Jean Marc LevyLeblond deliberately introduce confusions and even plagiarize one another in the process: http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...4dc146100e32c? Tom Roberts: "If it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains of applicability would be reduced)." Pentcho Valev 
#8




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ps.com... : : Androcles wrote: : "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message : oups.com... : : : : Androcles wrote: : : "Pentcho Valev" wrote in message : : ups.com... : : : An extremely important discovery made recently by Tom Roberts, the : : : Albert Einstein of our generation and apparently the last active : : : hypnotist in Einstein criminal cult: : : : : : : : : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...32844f0766cea? : : : Tom Roberts wrote in sci.physics.relativity: "While the constancy of : : : the speed of light was important in the historical development of SR, : : : I agree it has no logical place as a postulate of SR. Einstein's : : : second postulate can be replaced by any of a number of suitable : : : postulates, of which I like this one best: There is a finite upper : : : bound on the speed of propagation of information." : : : : : : So time dilation, length contraction and all other idiocies will now : : : be rigorously deduced from "there is a finite upper bound on the speed : : : of propagation of information". The world is eager to see the : : : deduction. : : : : : : Pentcho Valev : : : : What Humpty Roberts likes isn't relevant to physics. : : Einstein's time postulate is : the time required by light to travel from : A : : to B equals the time it requires to travel from B to A, which is : disproven : : by the Cassini probe to Saturn. : : That's a fact whether Humpty Roberts agrees, disagrees, likes or doesn't : : like it. : : : : I suspect hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult like Tom Roberts think : : of themselves in the following way: "I am destroying human rationality : : and the grateful humanity pays me for that. Could there be a more : : convincing proof that I am great? No." : : : : Pentcho Valev : : : Actually he and Lucent Technologies parted company some time ago, I'm sure : they were tired of his rantings whilst on company time. : The real criminals are lurking hidden in wackypedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special...ity#Postulates : : where it is impossible to bring to the attention of the public what : Einstein's third postulate actually says, and such persuasive rhetoric such : as "the power of Einstein's argument" is carefully employed. : : If you attempt to amend wackypedia to the truth then Ed Schaffer, self : appointed wackypedia censor and editor, will not permit it. : : At least criminals in Wikipedia are straightforward  the speed of : light is constant and that's it. Relativists like Tom Roberts and Jean : Marc LevyLeblond deliberately introduce confusions and even : plagiarize one another in the process: : : http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf : JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the : photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the : special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations : which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...4dc146100e32c? : Tom Roberts: "If it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a : nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant : speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both : Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains : of applicability would be reduced)." : : Pentcho Valev : Based as they are on the scifi rantings of Einstein and his time machine pseudomathematics, neither one advances any understanding of Nature as she really is. Maxwell's equations were refuted by Einstein himself anyway. "It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamicsas usually understood at the present timewhen applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. " Einstein. The socalled "invariance of photon velocity" doesn't exist. 
#9




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
Androcles wrote: "Pentcho Valev" wrote: : At least criminals in Wikipedia are straightforward  the speed of : light is constant and that's it. Relativists like Tom Roberts and Jean : Marc LevyLeblond deliberately introduce confusions and even : plagiarize one another in the process: : : http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf : JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the : photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the : special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations : which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...4dc146100e32c? : Tom Roberts: "If it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a : nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant : speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both : Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains : of applicability would be reduced)." : : Pentcho Valev : Based as they are on the scifi rantings of Einstein and his time machine pseudomathematics, neither one advances any understanding of Nature as she really is. Maxwell's equations were refuted by Einstein himself anyway. "It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamicsas usually understood at the present timewhen applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. " Einstein. The socalled "invariance of photon velocity" doesn't exist. Einstein went even further: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf Einstein 1935: "One does not have the right today to maintain that the foundation [of physics] must consist of a field theory in the sense of Maxwell. The other possibility leads in my opinion to a renunciation of the spacetime continuum..." Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult know quite well that, as far as the deductive nature of contemporary physics is concerned, "nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics" is a corollary of the simple fact that the speed of light is not independent of the relative speed of the light source and the observer. That is the reason why they are so silent. Pentcho Valev 
#10




SPECIAL RELATIVITY WITHOUT THE LIGHT POSTULATE
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ups.com... : : Androcles wrote: : "Pentcho Valev" wrote: : : At least criminals in Wikipedia are straightforward  the speed of : : light is constant and that's it. Relativists like Tom Roberts and Jean : : Marc LevyLeblond deliberately introduce confusions and even : : plagiarize one another in the process: : : : : http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf : : JeanMarc LevyLeblond: "The evidence of the nonzero mass of the : : photon would not, as such, shake in any way the validity of the : : special relalivity. It would, however, nullify all its derivations : : which are based on the invariance of the photon velocity." : : : : : http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...4dc146100e32c? : : Tom Roberts: "If it is ultimately discovered that the photon has a : : nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the invariant : : speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but both : : Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their domains : : of applicability would be reduced)." : : : : Pentcho Valev : : : Based as they are on the scifi rantings of Einstein and his time machine : pseudomathematics, neither one advances any understanding of Nature as she : really : is. : Maxwell's equations were refuted by Einstein himself anyway. : "It is known that Maxwell's electrodynamicsas usually understood at the : present timewhen applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries which do : not appear to be inherent in the phenomena. " Einstein. : The socalled "invariance of photon velocity" doesn't exist. : : Einstein went even further: : : http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf : Einstein 1935: "One does not have the right today to maintain that the : foundation [of physics] must consist of a field theory in the sense of : Maxwell. The other possibility leads in my opinion to a renunciation : of the spacetime continuum..." Rights? Opinions? Nature doesn't give a rat's arse about Einstein's or anyone else's rights and opinions, that's political talk. What's the big deal if the spacetime continuum is "renounced"? So it should be, it was garbage to begin with, much ado about nothing. : Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely : possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is : on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle : in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of : the rest of contemporary physics." Aww...What a shame. His whole castle in the air was a house of cards in the aether anyway, aka vapourware. : : Hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult know quite well that, as far as : the deductive nature of contemporary physics is concerned, "nothing : will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of : gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics" is : a corollary of the simple fact that the speed of light is not : independent of the relative speed of the light source and the : observer. That is the reason why they are so silent. : : Pentcho Valev His theory of gravitation is bent spacetime anyway, isn't it? When I see a theory that includes magnetism, a far more powerful force than gravity, I might sit up and take notice. http://www.supermagnete.de/eng/photo...ze_de/0496.jpg 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Galileo (NOT Einstein) is inventor of Second postulate of Relativity  physicsajay  Astronomy Misc  38  November 8th 06 09:19 PM 
Galileo (NOT Einstein) is inventor of Second postulate of Relativity  AJAY SHARMA  Policy  11  November 7th 06 02:46 AM 
Galileo (NOT Einstein) is inventor of Second postulate of Relativity  AJAY SHARMA  Amateur Astronomy  10  November 7th 06 02:46 AM 
Galileo (NOT Einstein) is inventor of Second postulate of Relativity  AJAY SHARMA  Misc  0  November 5th 06 03:22 AM 
Light Speed Test versus Special Relativity  Stan Byers  Astronomy Misc  35  April 4th 05 01:43 PM 