[John-Erik Persson]

Chaos in physics

• No light duality, since photoelectric effect and Compton effect can be united with the wave model
  No light particles
• No Lorentz transform, since the transform is in conflict with the wave model since 1887

John-Erik

[John-Erik Persson]

Stephan

1. You demand mathematical relations to explain physical phenomena, but math can only describe, and not explain, the Compton effect.
2. The Compton effect is not one collision, but two physical processes.
3. First: radiation causes an electron escape.
4. This process is reversible.
5. Second: capturing an electron generates radiation.

c is about one million times the speed of sound and we have no experience that proves that we need another description for high speeds.

John-Erik

On Sat, Sep 27, 2025 at 12:54 AM Stephan Gift <stepha...@uwi.edu> wrote:

John-Erik,

I agree that the LTs are wrong. However you have argued in the past, as you are doing now, that the Galilean transformations (GTs) are suitable replacements. I believe I asked you to show how the GTs can account for Thomas precession and you have not done so. Until you do, along with other phenomena like relativistic beaming and Compton scattering, you really cannot reasonably claim that the GTs are adequate. I argue that the GTs are the correct transformations for low speeds (v<<c) but fail at high speeds. The Selleri transformations account for high-speed and low-speed phenomena as they reduce to the GTs for v<<c.

Regards

Stephan

 

From: John-Erik Persson <joer...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, 26 September 2025 6:37 pm
To: Stephan Gift <stepha...@uwi.edu>
Subject: Fwd: [npa-relativity]

 

A also think that the Lorentz transform is wrong

See this

John-Erik

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "npa-relativity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to npa-relativit...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/npa-relativity/CAECQJUBfBKatv%3DnD-werYQXnEFHfMEnNDA%3DFpngJCnPur77vkQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Stephan Gift]

John-Erik,

In order to claim that the GTs are adequate, you must show mathematically that they can reproduce a range of phenomena including Thomas precession. Until you are able to do so, your claim would be without foundation.

[John-Erik Persson]

Stephan

No, we cannot prove one theory as correct, since many theories can have the same prediction. Instead we must disprove all the alternatives.

John-Erik