On May 15, 9:39 am, "El Enrrabadore-mor"
wrote:
"bz" escreveu na mensagemnews:Xns9A9E5F878EB4AWQAHBGMXSZHVspammote@ 130.39.198.139...

"El Enrrabadore-mor" wrote in
:

All I have is the above abstract which leads no where.
Read it where? Can't read the paper. I don't have a clue
on what Uncle Al said, as everybody else, since that's
exactly the point.

I will e-mail you a copy.
e-mail me at bz plus nanae at chem dot lsu dot edu

Many thanks, but I don't have nor time nor enough
interest to read it.
The abstract tells you what it is about. The article is on an
experiment involving rotation that the authors claim proves special
relativity.

I was just looking for someone that could make any sense
explaining how relativity deals with the most common
problems of all - rotations.
Yet, you don't have the time or the interest in reading about an
experiment where the investigators have claimed to prove relativity
with rotation.

Rotations might sound something irrelevant to most of
the readers,
Except for the articles of authors of that article you don't
want to read. These authors seem to feel rotations are very important.
Also look up the Hefele-Keating experiment. The clocks in this
experiment are subjected to rotation around the center of the earth.

nevertheless no one, ever, had pointed me
a celestial body which is not rotating and orbiting.
How is that relevant? Rotation is anlyzed in just about every
physics course I have taken. Einstein describes rotating systems in
his articles. Why are you ignoring all that research?

Besides that, gyroscopes are still unexplained.
Gravity and inertia are still the major source of speculation.
Nonsense. The problem is that you don't have the background or the
interest to look up the relevant articles.
Regards.
(I won't even take time to reply Darwin123)
Thank you!