Newsgroups: sci.physics, sci.math, alt.philosophy, sci.physics.relativity
From: "Dorn.Strich" <iqgoo...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Local: Mon, Mar 30 2009 1:40 pm
Subject: Re: Is relativity I L L O G I C A L?
On Mar 30, 11:58 am, papa_r...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On 30 mar, 11:42, "Dorn.Strich" <iqgoo...@gmail.com> wrote:And right now, E0 and M0 are defined quantities. And they are defined
> > On Mar 30, 11:37 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mar 30, 10:12 am, "Strich.Nein" <strich.9...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Mar 30, 10:39 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 30, 9:31 am, "Strich.Nein" <strich.9...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Mar 30, 9:50 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mar 30, 8:35 am, S T R I C H <strich.9...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > It is quite pathetic to see the relativists trying to use all their
> > > > > > > Of course it does. Look at the definition in your own link.
> > > > > > Are you trying to say that since the laws of physics appear to break
> > > > > Not at all. I didn't say the reference frame of the photon doesn't
> > > > Precisely because the fallacy of the constancy of the speed of light
> > > > > > First of all, the constancy of the velocity of light IS NOT a physical
> > > > > The laws of electrodynamics are certainly physical laws.
> > > > The constancy of the speed of light does not follow from the laws of
> > > That's incorrect.
> > > > Rememeber, Einstein stated it
> > > What Einstein stated is a direct consequence of assuming that the laws
> > > - Show quoted text -
> > Wrong Bozo.
> > Lightspeed constancy is not a DIRECT consequence of the validity of
> Biting the dust again ah David? Why do you not take a break and study
> "Consider, now, a wave-like disturbance which is self-regenerating,
for free space. Why do you think there are ZERO subscripts there?
These are not about Eric's degrees. This is because epsilon and mu
take on different values in different inertial frames. Of course,
Einstein assumed one would measure the same value, but who has
measured such values? Again it boils down to an assumption that
Einstein makes. The constancy of E0 and M0 in ALL inertial frames is
not a direct consequence of Maxwell's equations. Try to use that
brain, if you can.
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.