🚀 go-pugleaf

takecool a �crit :
> On Dec 6, 5:26 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
>> John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
>> evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
>> universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
>> relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
>> WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
>> POSTULATE."
>>
>> Similarly:
>>
>> THE POUND-REBKA EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE WITH AN EMISSION THEORY
>> OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE.
>>
>> Indeed, the Pound-Rebka experiment confirmed the equation f'=f(1+V/
>> c^2) which is EQUIVALENT to Einstein's 1911 equation c'=c(1+V/c^2)
>> which is EQUIVALENT to the equation c'=c+v given by the EMISSION
>> theory of light.
>>
>> Pentcho Valev
>> pva...@yahoo.com
> The mathematical arguments that refute derivation of E=mc2

You mean E=mc^3 ?

Or taht the proof is not a mathematical one (hint : it coumld not be, as 
"Energy" is not a math�matical notion


>  ( Sep 1905,  Einstein,  A., Annalen der Physik 18, 639  (1905).)
> can be found  at
> 
>     www.AjayOnLine.us
> The arguments are published in international journals and conferences.


Good for you. So is the whole of Usenet...


[*plonk*]

> If someone needs the  copy of book
> 
> Einstein's E=mc2 Generalized

No, thanks


> 
>  can be sent if required for observations.
> Book is available at
>  www.amazon.com.
> 
> visit for details
> 
> www.AjayOnline.us
>