Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics, sci.astro, fr.sci.physique, fr.sci.maths
From: Tom Roberts <tjroberts...@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 14:37:50 GMT
Local: Thurs, Dec 6 2007 9:37 am
Subject: Re: EXPERIMENTS THAT REFUTE RELATIVITY
Pentcho Valev wrote:Sure. The fact that this one experiment is compatible with other
> John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
> evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
> universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
> relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
> WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
theories does not refute relativity in any way. The full experimental
record refutes most if not all emission theories, but not relativity.
> THE POUND-REBKA EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH AN EMISSION THEORYSure. But this experiment, too, does not refute relativity. The full
> OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE.
experimental record refutes most if not all emission theories, but not
> Indeed, the Pound-Rebka experiment confirmed the equation f'=f(1+V/This is just a repeat of the nonsense you continually attempt to
> c^2) which is EQUIVALENT to Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)
> which is EQUIVALENT to the equation c'=c+v given by the EMISSION
> theory of light.
promulgate. The "equivalence" you claim is wrong, and is based on
intermixing various INCOMPLETE ideas and applying them outside their
domains of validity....
Einstein himself abandoned that 1911 equation in favor of GR, in which
The physical situation to which that 1911 equation applies
Anticipating Valev's usual childish response as he "stalks" me in this
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.