Article View: sci.physics
Article #15304Re: New Year question from Leo
From: Russ Lyttle
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:08
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:08
35 lines
3081 bytes
3081 bytes
Harry wrote: > > "Greg Neill" <gneillREM@OVE.netcom.ca> wrote in message > news:ZjfKb.74347$by2.859190@wagner.videotron.net... >> "Harry" <harald.vanlintel@epfl.ch> wrote in message >> news:3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch... >> > >> > "Franz Heymann" <notfranz.heymann@btopenworld.com> wrote in message >> > news:btbcc0$qri$5@titan.btinternet.com... >> > > >> > > "Sergey Karavashkin" <selftrans@yandex.ru> wrote in message >> > > news:a42650fc.0401041424.31edb781@posting.google.com... >> > > >> > > [snip >> > > >> > > . This theorem is >> > > > incompatible with the current system of Maxwell equations. >> > > >> > > Then you are a crackpot. >> > >> > Your logic labels Einstein a crackpot... >> >> Einstein's equations are wholly compatible with Maxwell's. > > Except for low velocities, Einstein's theorems are incompatible with > Newton's equations. > Similarly, Ampere's equations are partially incompatible with those of > Maxwell. Not quiet. Einstein *assumes* that Newton was correct and adds a forth assumption : the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames of reference. All of the Tensor math Einstein did was to make Newtons Laws hold in all inertial frames of reference. -- Russ Lyttle
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<A_IKb.40467$Pg1.19800@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!tethys.csu.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!6bd29e01!not-for-mailReferences:
<a42650fc.0312231529.65b841bd@posting.google.com> <a42650fc.0312281440.1ee617e7@posting.google.com> <2a0cceff.0312281924.7853d32f@posting.google.com> <a42650fc.0401041424.31edb781@posting.google.com> <btbcc0$qri$5@titan.btinternet.com> <3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> <ZjfKb.74347$by2.859190@wagner.videotron.net> <3ffa73fa$1@epflnews.epfl.ch>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10b271,ef7eb0d662ead2d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b271,public X-Google-Thread: 106ae0,ef7eb0d662ead2d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid106ae0,public X-Google-Thread: 1038c2,ef7eb0d662ead2d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid1038c2,public X-Google-Thread: 1110fe,ef7eb0d662ead2d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid1110fe,public X-Google-Thread: 10f545,ef7eb0d662ead2d4 X-Google-Attributes: gid10f545,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-01-06 17:08:49 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!tethys.csu.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!6bd29e01!not-for-mail From: Russ Lyttle <lyttlec@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: New Year question from Leo Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,fj.sci.matter,sci.physics.relativity Followup-To: sci.physics Reply-To: lyttlec@earthlink.net References: <a42650fc.0312231529.65b841bd@posting.google.com> <a42650fc.0312281440.1ee617e7@posting.google.com> <2a0cceff.0312281924.7853d32f@posting.google.com> <a42650fc.0401041424.31edb781@posting.google.com> <btbcc0$qri$5@titan.btinternet.com> <3ff969fe$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> <ZjfKb.74347$by2.859190@wagner.videotron.net> <3ffa73fa$1@epflnews.epfl.ch> Lines: 37 Organization: self User-Agent: KNode/0.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Message-ID: <A_IKb.40467$Pg1.19800@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 01:08:48 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.184.0.252 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net 1073437728 63.184.0.252 (Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:08:48 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2004 17:08:48 PST