🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jan 11, 11:14 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> http://www.usnews.com/usnews/culture/articles/030526/26beyond.htm

This is a typical distortion of history.  Actual historic timeline
regarding the development of relativity is as follows.

**  About 400 years ago, Galileo identified the principle of
relativity.  The mathematics is the Galilean transform itself.

**  In 1881, Michelson alone set out to measure the drift velocity of
the earth in the background of the Aether.  The results were null
based on the Galilean transform.

**  In 1887, Voigt proposed the constancy in the speed of light
relative to all observers.  The Voigt transform as a modification to
the Galilean transform becomes the mathematics of Voigt's work.
Although the Voigt transform explains the null results of Michelson's
experiment, it violates the principle of relativity.

**  In 1887 a few months after Voigt's work, Michelson and Morley
conducted their famous experiment (MMX), and the results were also
null.

**  In 1889, FitzGerald proposed a longitudinal length contraction to
the travel arm of the MMX.

**  In 1897, Larmor modified the Voigt transform into the Lorentz
transform.  The constancy in the speed of light still holds for the
Lorentz transform.  However, the Lorentz transform now obeys the
principle of relativity.

**  In 1899, Lorentz knowing about Larmor's work wrote the Lorentz
transform with his ludicrous interpretation now called LET.

**  In 1904, Poincare proclaimed relative simultaneity as a property
of the Lorentz transform.  His interpretation to the Lornetz transform
would later be called SR.

**  In 1905, Einstein reverse-engineered the Lorentz transform and
tried to pass it as he was the first to derive it based on the two
postulates.  In doing so, he made a series of errors, but the results
were always what were of expectations.  Einstein was a nitwit, a
plagiarist, and a liar.

**  In 1908, Minkowski discovered a single equation to represent the
Lorentz transform.

**  In 1911, Longevin jokingly mentioned the twin's paradox as an
Achilles heel of the Lorentz transform.  The twin's paradox can be
resolved in a numerous ways where each one is in direct contradiction
of the others.  Thus, effectively, the twin's paradox has not been
resolved.  In fact, it cannot be.