🚀 go-pugleaf

"Tom Roberts" <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message 
news:2PT5j.51831$eY.40237@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> Pentcho Valev 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."
>
> Sure. The fact that this one experiment is compatible with other theories 
> does not refute relativity in any way. The full experimental record 
> refutes most if not all emission theories, but not relativity.

Indeed .. there are a whole bunch of experiments that are compatible with 
emission theory .. you can drop two different masses from a tower and see 
that they fall at the same rate of acceleration, you can boil water and find 
its boiling point at 100C .. all that is just as meaningless as MM because 
it is NOT an experiment that could possibly refute emission theory.

However, those experiments that COULD refute emission theory have shown it 
to be false .. so we need to throw it into the enormous junkpile of refuted 
theories of physics and move on.  That 's what scientists do ..its only 
fanatics and nutcases like Pentcho the cling for dear life to an old refuted 
theory for no logical reason (maybe its just that the want some attention). 
Sad.