Diverging Opinions on Physics Foundations

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Perspicacious

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 2:19:39 PM2/14/05
to
We are nearing the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein's "miracle
year" and physicists the world over will be commemorating that event
with a spectacular celebration. No one expects the planned festivities
to be ruined but, in a recent authoritative declaration that is sure to
agitate the physics community, one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician
has boldly and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates for
special relativity are obsolete.

"The preferred way to derive the Lorentz transformation, if you like
clarity and charm, is to do it algebraically, based solely on the
homogeneity of time. There is no need to require Einstein's first or
second postulate."

See section 4 of
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf

The revolutionary new discovery, which clarifies special relativity, is
sure to replace the old-fashioned way that special relativity has been
taught for the last one hundred years.

Gregory L. Hansen

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 2:46:37 PM2/14/05
to
In article <1108408779....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,

Perspicacious <iperspi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>We are nearing the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein's "miracle
>year" and physicists the world over will be commemorating that event
>with a spectacular celebration.

Expect drinking, debauchery, dancing in the streets... Oh, you said
physicists...

--
"Are those morons getting dumber or just louder?" -- Mayor Quimby

Sam Wormley

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 3:20:01 PM2/14/05
to
Perspicacious wrote:
> We are nearing the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein's "miracle
> year" and physicists the world over will be commemorating that event
> with a spectacular celebration. No one expects the planned festivities
> to be ruined but, in a recent authoritative declaration that is sure to
> agitate the physics community, one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician
> has boldly and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates for
> special relativity are obsolete.
>

Einstein's theories are empirically correct. Buzz off troll!

Bilge

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 4:00:25 PM2/14/05
to
Perspicacious:
>We are nearing the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein's "miracle
>year" and physicists the world over will be commemorating that event
>with a spectacular celebration. No one expects the planned festivities
>to be ruined but, in a recent authoritative declaration that is sure to
>agitate the physics community, one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician
>has boldly and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates for
>special relativity are obsolete.

That ``dynamic, proof-toting mathematician'' is an idiot.


Bill Hobba

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 4:51:45 PM2/14/05
to

"Perspicacious" <iperspi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1108408779....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

The author of that document Eugene Schubert is a well known quite sick
crank. His ideas have been refuted many times. But since you are probably
him you would know that already.

Bill


Uncle Al

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 4:54:44 PM2/14/05
to
Perspicacious wrote:
>
> We are nearing the 100th anniversary of Albert Einstein's "miracle
> year" and physicists the world over will be commemorating that event
> with a spectacular celebration.

Bread and circuses for the mob; grantology for academic beggars.

> No one expects the planned festivities
> to be ruined but, in a recent authoritative declaration that is sure to
> agitate the physics community, one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician
> has boldly and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates for
> special relativity are obsolete.

Special Relativity is a pure geometry. Absent an empirical
falsification you would need invalidate all of number theory to ding
Special Relatlvity. That second alternative ain't gonna happen.

[snip crap]

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf

Perspicacious

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 5:57:34 PM2/14/05
to
It's obvious that going all the way from Euclidean geometry, and
only postulating the homogeneity of time, to logically deriving
special relativity and its equations, is an awesome achievement
of the human mind.

Perspicacious

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 6:16:21 PM2/14/05
to
> one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician has boldly
> and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates
> for special relativity are obsolete.

"obsolete: No longer in use"

Understand that great visionaries sometimes speak of the
future as if the future were already here.

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf

Felix Rawlings

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 6:36:52 PM2/14/05
to

Are you for real? You use the language in a most amusing way.


Bill Hobba

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 7:20:06 PM2/14/05
to

"Felix Rawlings" <fr...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.02.14....@yahoo.com...

Eugene is a well known crank - and yes he is for real - and obviously at
least a bit sick as well.

Thanks
Bill


Lady Chatterly

unread,
Feb 14, 2005, 8:50:30 PM2/14/05
to
In article <1108422981.4...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>

Perspicacious <iperspi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> one dynamic, proof-toting mathematician has boldly
>> and confidently declared that Einstein's postulates
>> for special relativity are obsolete.
>
>"obsolete: No longer in use"

It is a good thing is that the 'mushroom clouds over us cities ' were
a fantasy of the internet.

>Understand that great visionaries sometimes speak of the
>future as if the future were already here.

We do not have to go to the bone.

--
Lady Chatterly

"It's Mark Twain and you're replying to a bot." -- Reverend Mosnar©

Perspicacious

unread,
Feb 15, 2005, 11:29:35 AM2/15/05
to
> The author of that document Eugene Schubert is a well known
> quite sick crank. His ideas have been refuted many times.

The simple mathematical reasoning in
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf is
undeniably new and refreshing. From my point of view, anyone
who speaks disparagingly of anything that elegant and beautiful
is totally blind and clinically evil. I wonder if you have the
curiosity and mental acuity to notice the complete lack of
understanding to my opening remark by many of the other respondents.
Aren't you on their side? Seeing that you haven't pointed me to a
single, obvious, self-incriminating statement, argument or faulty
equation in the carefully articulated paper that I cited and that
you don't take issue with those who possess no understanding of
the reasoning whatsoever, you are probably just as ignorant and
predisposed to bandwagons and hasty conclusions as they are. Will
you be justifying your insults with real substance? It's plainly
evident that you failed to post a link to any cogent rebuttal of
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf. If a
cogent rebuttal exists, where is it?

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages