Eric, you are welcome to your opinion, here are the facts. 2 thought experiments I have presented created a paradox that has turned out to be correct, disproving a commonly held component of General Relativity, that G-force has time dilation equivalent to time dilation of gravity (2 wikipedia pages state such), but experiments with muons have dis-proven this.
I have presented about 8 to 10 other thought experiments, no one has been able to explain what should happen in any of them (many I have presented for years), except for 1 which I disproved myself inside of a day. Special Relativity has made the assumption that the speed of light is constant, this is despite many findings otherwise. Considering that almost all light speed measurements are based on the 2 way speed this means that little net difference would be noted, and if an entrained aether is assumed with Lorentz transformations of particles that move through the aether... And if you measure the speed of sound of a source approaching or receding you will not get a difference in the speed of sound. If you measure the speed of sound in a vehicle you will not measure a different be measured at C of sound. There are various transformations that can make the speed of light be measured as C that are used in Special Relativity, except that *there is no transformation of space or time that can explain how if you accelerate towards a photon you will not pass by it at a greater velocity*! It is interesting that there are many ways that the speed of light is explained, except in this case it is taken on faith. Many scientists of the day never believed in Special Relativity, it has since been accepted and confirmation bias has done the job since. There are many examples where if you look at the evidence you will find it is interpreted in a way to confirm Special Relativity and rules out other theories, but in many cases it is pretty obvious it better supports another theory. That last bit may be opinion, but the rest is fact. Additionally the books I read on SR did not explain how magnetism can be seen as a function of Lorentz and other distortions of motion on electrons, but I realized this all myself in every effect, this is evidence I understand SR really quite well, well enough to have a shot at disproving it. If you want to believe it is settled science as many do, you are welcome to do so. But I question it because no one is able to answer some very important questions such as how a photon can be explained to be C unless we are closing in distance toward it and then the only answers I get seem to be based on faith, in Einstein and scientific impartiality. Which IMO you are not doing very well on. John On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 10:35 AM, D R Lunsford <antimatter3...@gmail.com>wrote: > > No one will ever take cold fusion seriously if they come here and read >> nonsense about how relativity is wrong. >> > > You are no doubt correct about all of the nonsense going over this list > about relativity being wrong. I suspect that there is someone, somewhere > out there, who can argue persuasively for looking at some corners of > relativity that have not been sufficiently probed. Such a person is > probably not on this list. There is one soul who has bet the farm on > relativity being wrong, who has all confidence in his understanding of the > matter and who intends to teach us about our ignorance. There are one or > two others who have been entertaining some of the thought experiments as an > interesting exercise. The universe is in order, for this is a list for > discussing the way-out and improbable with an open mind. There's no one to > tell these folks that they should hew to the orthodox and put away the > fantasies about relativity being wrong. It's a little unsettling, but you > just have to get used to a low signal-to-noise ratio and keep an eye out > for the interesting gems of insight that are occasionally mentioned. > Anyone who would be put off by the current discussion of relativity would > be unlikely to be influenced by something more profound that might also be > discussed at some point. They would just unsubscribe in disgust, as > happens from time to time. > > Eric > >
