🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jun 7, 9:16 am, "Spirit of Truth" <junehar...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> "jem" <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> > Spirit of Truth wrote:
> >> MMX did NOT prove anything. ANY child could expain
> >> that if light was ballistic the two way result would have given the
> >> result they got OR if one simply looked at Galileon relativity
> >> the local distance the light travelled would obviously not
> >> change so would have given the same result.
>
> > Based on your frequently displayed "knowledge" of facts, Spirit, your
> > choice of stage name is oxymoronic.  What the MMX "proved" is that light
> > wasn't a wave traveling through a material substance - an important
> > discovery since, based on lots of other discoveries, light was presumed to
> > be a wave.  And, although some later discoveries were consistent with
> > particulate light, it's clear, at this point, that light isn't ballistic
> > (e.g., the GPS wouldn't work if it were).
>
> Jem, you should know better than that. Many experts in SR
> state exactly what I stated above about MMX.. And, anybody
> with even a midicum understanding of math (a child) could expain
> it to you.

The crucial question is not "Is light particle or wave?" but, rather,
"The speed of light DEPENDS on the speed of the light source, in
accordance with Newton's emission theory of light, or it is
INDEPENDENT of the speed of the light source, in accordance first with
the aether theory and later with special relativity?". In 1887 this
question SHOULD have been asked since both the emission theory and the
aether theory had been established officially. If the question HAD
been asked, the Michelson-Morley experiment would have confirmed the
DEPENDENCE and refuted the INDEPENDENCE. In other words, Einstein's
1905 false light postulate would have been refuted in advance.

Scientists found it suitable to save the false INDEPENDENCE by
advancing ad hoc auxiliary hypotheses - FitzGerald's length
contraction was the first step in the long journey that in the end
killed physics:

http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
Bryan Wallace: "Einstein's special relativity theory with his second
postulate that the speed of light in space is constant is the linchpin
that holds the whole range of modern physics theories together.
Shatter this postulate, and modern physics becomes an elaborate
farce!"

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=317&Itemid=81&lecture_id=3576
John Stachel: "Einstein discussed the other side of the particle-field
dualism - get rid of fields and just have particles."
Albert Einstein 1954: "I consider it entirely possible that physics
cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous
structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air,
including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of
contemporary physics."
John Stachel's comment: "If I go down, everything goes down, ha ha,
hm, ha ha ha."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com