I think there are aspects of QM that are rather well established, but
much less so with SR.
It seems to me that Quantum Physics is open to many different
interpretations and really isn't dogmatic about which is true.<<
Like Quantum physics - SR is open to different interpretations, but
unlike Quantum physics rarely admits to the different interpretations.
For instance -- Lorentz transformations can be interpreted the
Einsteinian or Lorentzian way.
------ Original Message ------
From: "Jonathan Berry" <jonathanberry3...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, 12 Nov, 23 At 00:50
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether
Discussing about physics needs years long reflection about what
physical constants mean and how these interrelate and are
measured.
A constant is an obsession and assumption that it will continue under
all conditions.
In the case of Light speed it is an illogical assumption if we apply
what might be true for the 2 way speed of light is also true for the one
way speed of light.
Also I have been thinking about this for 25 years, is that enough?
Further we must understand that all current still hyped models
have been developed with marginal experimental knowledge.
Very true!
If somebody believes that e.g. QM is a fundamental model that he
is a member of sect not a physicist.
I think there are aspects of QM that are rather well established, but
much less so with SR.
It seems to me that Quantum Physics is open to many different
interpretations and really isn't dogmatic about which is true.
There is even super-determinism which seems nuts to me that takes a lot
of the weirdness from QM.
Also the many worlds interpretation removes a lot of weirdness.
Same for GR that already Einstein in 1952 declared being a castle
in the air. He then argued that the world is made of infinite many
systems with their own speed of light (c) and thus any relation
between such systems constructed by SRT/GR are fiction not
science.
He was a lot more humble than those who continued his theories.
I wasn't aware he said that and will seek an exact quote.
The problem is the photon of which we only can measure the local
wave number = energy in relation to local "c". Theoretically we
could find its velocity by taking into account the red/blue shift
but which model should we use. SRT provably only works for local
mass but what shall we do with a photon speed of c+v?
Using red or blue shift for speed, or at least adjustments of speed is
logical.
Though I guess it tells us nothing of the speed of the medium, that only
cares about relative velocity between emitter and reciever.
Consequence: We have to overcome the today's silly - kindergarten
physics models and we should start to understand the structure of
all forms of matter. I could teach 2 term course about all
failures and errors in current physics - models and also what for
the models still are good and can be used.
No doubt.
On researchgate.net <http://researchgate.net> there are 3 running
discussion about gravity. Of course 80% of all posters just want
to promote new ideas and sometimes one is OK. (myself included..)
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_ultimate_reason_for_the_gravitational_force
<https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_ultimate_reason_for_the_gravitational_force>
https://www.researchgate.net/post/An_old_question_that_is_still_fresh_Is_gravity_a_Newtonian_force_or_Einstein_space-time_curvature
<https://www.researchgate.net/post/An_old_question_that_is_still_fresh_Is_gravity_a_Newtonian_force_or_Einstein_space-time_curvature>
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_a_solid_counter-argument_against_Dingles_old_objection_to_Relativity_Theory/680
<https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_a_solid_counter-argument_against_Dingles_old_objection_to_Relativity_Theory/680>
Another idea I came across is that gravity is a result of time dilation!
This idea as it was relayed (by a believer in SR who was teaching it as
fact.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxQTvqcpSg&;
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxQTvqcpSg&;>
But, rather than the explanation he gives, it makes me think the
following. What if every bit of space emits pressure, well space would
expand (hmmm, it seems to) and where time dilation is present there
would be less emission!
And as such there would be a push towards such space.
Only one thing is clear, general relativity is a marginal, just
mathematical model once the Nobel committee called unphysical. It
is brilliant math and of no use for our real world, that urgently
needs a new "infinite" and cheap energy source. May be even that
is a bad idea as long as the (fascist finance) pigs have the power
and we then would help them to further destroy the planet.
J.W.
PS: Invest your thinking for the progress of mankind not for
reasoning about the morgue of standard model "physics"
Well, if people can realize it is false then mankind would make better
progress.
It is far from my main thrust.
