🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 4, 11:26 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:

> The other is the assumption that ALL measurements
> of the speed of light no matter what the velocity of the experimenter
> always give the same value.

NO crank.

"Any ray of light moves in the ``stationary'' system of co-ordinates
with the determined velocity c, whether the ray be emitted by a
stationary or by a moving body." Einstein

He later refutes this to show that simultanmeity does not apply
between stationary and moving frames.

Actually, Einstein proved that the constancy of the speed of light is
incompatible with Galilean relativity.

That is all he proved. A not remarkable result. He did not prove
however that simultaneity is relative. Actually, he proved the
opposite: if constancy of the speed of lighgt is assumed, simultaneity
is absolute. This is why Minkowski ( a smart man unfortunately died
young)asked him to change the name of his theory to "Theory of
Absolutes" (speed of light, simultaneity, etc). He refused, because he
was afraid of losing popularity, as the word "relative" was very
popular in social sciences and underground movements.

This is one reason you get paradoxes in SR, i.e. the fact that
simultaneity is absolute and you also have the principle of
Relativity.

There is a way to fix this but results in a theory that is not related
at all to the erroneous Einstein Relativity and it demands significant
sacrifices to be made in terms of observables.

Now, cranks go away. If you do not udnerstand what I wrote, it's
necause your IQ is less than that of a tomato.


Mike