🚀 go-pugleaf

Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com> wrote in message
  60638343-efbe-4355-8ffe-aab986e6f791@w24g2000prd.googlegroups.com
> On Nov 8, 2:30 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 8, 8:48 am, "Dirk Van de moortel"
>> <dirkvandemoor...@nospAm.hotmail.com> wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Alen <al...@westserv.net.au> wrote in message
>>
>>>   53917523-6fa1-4c96-b765-e3be80ce5...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com
>>
>>>> The so-called 'counterintuitive' is a severely problematic
>>>> feature in modern physics. It can be used, merely on the
>>>> prompting of some mathematical formula, without the
>>>> application of any other principle that might control and
>>>> validate its use.
>>
>>> Usually such "some mathematical formula" does not merely fall
>>> out the sky with the intention to cause a panic.
>>> First study this
>>> http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments....
>>> and then ask yourself whether "the so-called 'counterintuitive'
>>> is a severely problematic feature in modern physics", or whether
>>> it is a severely problematic feature in the severely untrained and
>>> ignorant brain of Joe the Plumber.
>>
>>> Dirk Vdm
>>
>> Bravo Moortel! Good zombie good sycophant! Unfortunately Master Tom
>> Roberts's teaching is silly:
>>
>> http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments....
>> Master Tom Roberts: "The Michelson-Morley experiment (MMX) was
>> intended to measure the velocity of the Earth relative to the
>> "lumeniferous ��er" which was at the time presumed to carry
>> electromagnetic phenomena. The failure of it and the other early
>> experiments to actually observe the Earth's motion through the ��er
>> became significant in promoting the acceptance of Einstein's theory of
>> Special Relativity, as it was appreciated from early on that
>> Einstein's approach (via symmetry) was more elegant and parsimonious
>> of assumptions than were other approaches (e.g. those of Maxwell,
>> Hertz, Stokes, Fresnel, Lorentz, Ritz, and Abraham)."
>>
>> Now compare Master Tom Roberts' teaching with Master John Norton's
>> teaching (Master John Norton's teaching is by no means silly):
>>
>> http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
>> Master 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."
>>
>> Pentcho Valev
>> pva...@yahoo.com- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> But then there are these little properties of light such as
> interference, diffraction, wavelength, and frequency which are NOT
> compatible with a bullet theory of light.
>
> And there is this little Nobel-prize-winning Quantum Electrodynamics,
> which is compatible with x-rays, gamma rays, radio waves, microwaves,
> photoelectric effect, and in fact, with all of the known properties of
> light and light-like phenomena and special relativity and without an
> ether.

And then there is also this little list of differences which
are not compatible with that which Poncho Volvo can wrap his
tiny little mind around:
    - rates vs. values,
    - a personal humorous musing vs. a common dogma,
    - children's books vs. inspired essays,
    - physicists vs. philosophers,
    - coordinate time vs. proper time,
    - invariance vs. constancy,
    - special relativity vs. general relativity,
    - teachers vs. hypnotists,
    - laymen vs. zombies,
    - a person being right vs. a theory being right,
    - students vs. imbeciles,
    - bad science vs. bad engineering,
    - bad engineering vs. bad cost management,
    - honing the foundations of a theory vs. fighting it,
    - physics vs. linguistics,
    - an article written in 1905 vs. a theory created in 1915,
    - understanding a book vs. turning its pages,
    - speed vs. relative (aka closing) speed,
    - doing algebra vs. randomly writing down symbols,
    - real life vs. a Usenet hobby group,
    - receiving a detailed reply vs. being ignored,
    - everyday concepts vs. scientific concepts in physics,
    - the three things that smell like fish,
    - inertial vs. non-inertial,
    - speed vs. velocity,
    - an article vs. a book,
    - relativity vs. disguised ether addiction,
    - algebra vs. analytic geometry,
    - kneeling down vs. bending over,
    - local vs. global,
    - a sycophant in English vs. in French,
    - a relation vs. an equation,
    - massive vs. massless particles,
    - a Mexican poncho vs. a Sears poncho,
    - implication vs. equivalence,
    - group velocity vs. phase velocity,
    - science vs. religion

Dirk Vdm