"Paul Stowe" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 09:31:43 -0700, Uncle Al
wrote:

mountain man wrote:

http://www.mountainman.com.au/aether_8.htm

Empirical idiot.

Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
No aether to 1.7x10^(-15) relative

http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/mans/clane/
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7
No Lorentz violation

Uncle Al is the 'self-imposed' ignorant!
(but certainly not stupid)

There is a clear difference between not necessary
for inclusion in an evaluation and non-existence.


When Einstein considered special relativity, and the
simplistic relationship between intertial frames of reference
he did not need to consider the aether postulate.

Ten years down the track, when he then expanded
his consideration to the more general concept of non
inertial frames and gravitation, he realised that the
aether postulate was still viable.



The above references are, as always, the formaer
and have NOTHING! whatsoever to do with the latter.

Paul Stowe