On May 13, 8:17*am, Mike wrote:
On May 11, 7:09*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:

On May 11, 1:13*pm, Mike wrote:
I think everything about theories should be ok in the ngs, even
trolling, but yet I recommend not characterizing anyone as criminal,
especially Roberts, with whom I have had many arguments with but he is
a good scienstist and does nto deserve this.

Only a criminal can teach Einstein zombie world that, even if "light
in vacuum does not travel at the invariant speed of the Lorentz
transform", special relativity "would be unaffected":

http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.ph...34dc146100e32c
Tom Roberts, Feb 1 2006: "If it is ultimately discovered that the
photon has a nonzero mass (i.e. light in vacuum does not travel at the
invariant speed of the Lorentz transform), SR would be unaffected but
both Maxwell's equations and QED would be refuted (or rather, their
domains of applicability would be reduced)."

That is a statement motivated by panic, I agree. But save the word
crminal for the time there will be a court for crimes committed
against humanity.

There will be one some time. Roberts is no criminal, just paniced and
confused. He cannto understand and accept that inconsiostent physiocal
theories should not be taught or even considered. He will spend his
life in vain trying to convince people otherwise.

The criminals are to be found in some other places.

Mike

Roberts' statement is NOT motivated by panic. This is a deliberate
destruction of human rationality. The original author of the idiotic
idea is called Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond (Roberts is just a plagiarist in
this case) ahd this Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond devised the destructive
idiocy long time ago, when there was still no panic at all and
Einstein zombie world was unanimously singing "Divine Einstein":

http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/chronogeometrie.pdf
Jean-Marc Lévy-Leblond "De la relativité à la chronogéométrie ou: Pour
en finir avec le "second postulat" et autres fossiles": "D'autre part,
nous savons aujourd'hui que l'invariance de la vitesse de la lumière
est une conséquence de la nullité de la masse du photon. Mais,
empiriquement, cette masse, aussi faible soit son actuelle borne
supérieure expérimentale, ne peut et ne pourra jamais être considérée
avec certitude comme rigoureusement nulle. Il se pourrait même que de
futures mesures mettent enévidence une masse infime, mais non-nulle,
du photon ; la lumière alors n'irait plus à la "vitesse de la
lumière", ou, plus précisément, la vitesse de la lumière, désormais
variable, ne s'identifierait plus à la vitesse limite invariante. Les
procedures operationnelles mises en jeu par le "second postulat"
deviendraient caduques ipso facto. La theorie elle-meme en serait-elle
invalidee ? Heureusement, il n'en est rien ; mais, pour s'en assurer,
il convient de la refonder sur des bases plus solides, et d'ailleurs
plus economiques. En verite, le "premier postulat" suffit, a la
condition de l'exploiter a fond."

http://o.castera.free.fr/pdf/onemorederivation.pdf
Jean-Marc Levy-Leblond: "This is the point of view from wich I intend
to criticize the overemphasized role of the speed of light in the
foundations of the special relativity, and to propose an approach to
these foundations that dispenses with the hypothesis of the invariance
of c....We believe that special relativity at the present time stands
as a universal theory discribing the structure of a common space-time
arena in which all fundamental processes take place....The evidence of
the nonzero mass of the photon would not, as such, shake in any way
the validity of the special relativity. It would, however, nullify all
its derivations which are based on the invariance of the photon
velocity."

Pentcho Valev