Albert's Fallacy
߃-- ¹¹
equivalence principle.
it states that gravitational and inertial mass are equivalent. This idea
is based in part upon the fact that the weight of a body is directly
proportional to it's inertial properties, and that the proportion is
always a constant.
Accordingly, there is no way occupants of a closed room could tell if
they were on a constantly accelerating spaceship, or on the surface of a
planet. The force is supposed to be the same whether it is the result of
a gravitational pull, or of being accelerated. ACCORDING to Einstein,
there is no experiment that would show the difference.
There are actually several experiments:
1. - If the room was on the surface of a planet, a sensitive gravity
meter would show a difference in weight, if it was moved a short
distance above the floor.
2. - On accelerating a elevator or spaceship, there would obviously be
no difference. a ball dropped on the surface, would be the same as the
one simultaneously dropped on the elevator, with the ONE essential
difference.
If this occurred on the surface of a planet, a steadily increasing
magnetic field would develop around the ball, as it appeared to fall. If
it occurred in the elevator the ball would not be subject to
acceleration, as the elevator floor moves up to contact the ball.
Therefore NO additional magnetic field will develop around the elevator
ball, while it was in the air.
3. - Suppose the ball was heavily charged with electricity. In addition,
a charged ball resting on the elevator floor would develop a steadily
increasing magnetic field due to the steady acceleration. This wouldn't
happen on the surface of a planet since the accelerating force is
directed to the surface, preventing an increase in velocity. This
disproves the equivalence fallacy, Albert
On another subject, E=MC², a body is supposed to shorten in the
direction of motion, and this dimension will approach 0,as it's velocity
approaches that of light. Two mutually contradictory statements arise
here:
1. Since one of the dimensions of the body itself, tends to vanish, the
body itself will tend to disappear.
2. Yet according to the theory, the mass of this disappearing, body,
approaching light velocity, becomes infinite.
Fortunately it is possible to visualize an action at faster than light
velocities: in fact instantaneous transportation / communication in this
analogy;
A laser mounted in a hollow rigid tube 1 light-year in length is turned
on at the same instant it is rotated once in 8 minutes. Of course the
light will have travelled 93,000,000 miles, while the opposite end of
the cylinder will have turned one rotation in terms of light year
velocity.
This is an instantaneous communication, with the other end of the rigid
tube, (ether) of one light year in length, thru a mechanical /
electrical rotation of such.
Universal Flying Objects create powerful fields to use such
analogies.with shaped resonance for time travel, in human terms.
߃--¹¹
The TimeLord
(=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=DF=83--_=B9=B9?=) in
21626-482...@storefull-3312.bay.webtv.net:
> One of the main foundations of the General Theory is the famous
> equivalence principle.
>
> it states that gravitational and inertial mass are equivalent. This idea
[...]
> There are actually several experiments:
>
> 1. - If the room was on the surface of a planet, a sensitive gravity
> meter would show a difference in weight, if it was moved a short
> distance above the floor.
That is because of the r^2 effect; not any violation of the equivalence
principle.
>
> 2. - On accelerating a elevator or spaceship, there would obviously be
> no difference. a ball dropped on the surface, would be the same as the
> one simultaneously dropped on the elevator, with the ONE essential
> difference.
That is because the acceleration of the elevator adds to the acceleration
of the planet; not any violation of the equivalence principle.
>
> If this occurred on the surface of a planet, a steadily increasing
> magnetic field would develop around the ball, as it appeared to fall. If
What if the ball is not magnetic? It would not respond to any applied
magnetic field. Besides, in this discussion we assume no charge.
Otherwise you would just add that effect in and still the equivalence
principle would not be violated.
[...]
> 3. - Suppose the ball was heavily charged with electricity. In addition,
[...]
cf above
>
> On another subject, E=MC², a body is supposed to shorten in the
> direction of motion, and this dimension will approach 0,as it's velocity
First of all, E=m*c^2 is only valid for objects at rest, since that
equation comes from a more general equation E^2=m^2*c^4+p^2*c^2. For
objects at rest p=0 and you get E=m*c^2. So the motion doesn't exist.
> approaches that of light. Two mutually contradictory statements arise
> here:
That's because you are critizing something you don't understand. Learn
physics first.
[...]
> Fortunately it is possible to visualize an action at faster than light
> velocities: in fact instantaneous transportation / communication in this
> analogy;
>
> A laser mounted in a hollow rigid tube 1 light-year in length is turned
> on at the same instant it is rotated once in 8 minutes. Of course the
> light will have travelled 93,000,000 miles, while the opposite end of
> the cylinder will have turned one rotation in terms of light year
> velocity.
Bad analogy. Since the kinetic energy of such "hollow rigid tube" would
exceed the available total energy of the universe, such an "analogy"
would be impossible. However, something similar has been done. When
Voyager 2 passed Neptune, the communication beam directed toward Earth
swept past Earth at faster than the speed of light before lock-up
occurred. Nothing in Relativity was violated, including the equivalence
principle.
[...]
> Universal Flying Objects create powerful fields to use such
> analogies.with shaped resonance for time travel, in human terms.
What is a Universal Flying Object?
Johnnie In The Billows
This must indeed be the phallic sea, through which transmit the
spermatazoa of gravitational radiation, battering progressively one
against the next till they burst in crests of dry semen.
This proved conclusively in the experiments of Rolf T. Chukkabutty,
Esq.