On 27 Nov 2003 19:45:30 -0800, (chenmou) wrote:

Hi Henri,


The LT concept is pretty simple. Unfortunately it is based on incorrect
assumptions whichever way it is derived.


Correct assumption implies correct conception and derivation.
Do you agree with my statement?

Which one?


Best regards

Chenmou


Henri Wilson.
See the Stupidity of Relativity.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

Dear all,

Thanks so much to persons who help me to understand LT concept.
Now I am making these statements as a conclusion of discussion.

1. LT concept is based on incorrect assumptions whichever way that it
is derived. -according to Henri Wilson's previous saying.
2. LT can not be derived from interchanging t and t', x and x', v with
–v, where v means a physical quantity that is symmetrical. Because no
explanation for this symmetry is imposed. –A survey of Eugene
Shubert's derivation.
3. Deriving LT from the assumption of that (ct)^2 - x^2 = (ct')^2 -
x'^2 is impossible in dark universe where light never exists, because
this assumption needs some invariant of light source.-Checking
articles post by Bilge.

Consequently, I caim that

1. Only image of an Object will contract due to high speed. The real
size will not be changed. Any experimental proof of LT using wave
length change is incorrect because it is just a result of mechanical
error.
2. Time delaying of a fast moving clock, like GPS, is caused by
mechanical error, computer truncation error, and other unknown
reasons, but not LT.
3. Phenomenons explained by SR really exist, but SR is not a precise
prediction. Because constants of SR equations are unable to be
accurately verified due to huge energy emission.

Best regards
Chenmou

Correct assumption implies correct conception and derivation.
Do you agree with my statement?

Which one?


Best regards

Chenmou


Henri Wilson.
See the Stupidity of Relativity.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

On 1 Dec 2003 01:01:33 -0800, (chenmou) wrote:

Dear all,

Thanks so much to persons who help me to understand LT concept.
Now I am making these statements as a conclusion of discussion.

1. LT concept is based on incorrect assumptions whichever way that it
is derived. -according to Henri Wilson's previous saying.
2. LT can not be derived from interchanging t and t', x and x', v with
–v, where v means a physical quantity that is symmetrical. Because no
explanation for this symmetry is imposed. –A survey of Eugene
Shubert's derivation.
3. Deriving LT from the assumption of that (ct)^2 - x^2 = (ct')^2 -
x'^2 is impossible in dark universe where light never exists, because
this assumption needs some invariant of light source.-Checking
articles post by Bilge.

Consequently, I caim that

1. Only image of an Object will contract due to high speed. The real
size will not be changed. Any experimental proof of LT using wave
length change is incorrect because it is just a result of mechanical
error.
2. Time delaying of a fast moving clock, like GPS, is caused by
mechanical error, computer truncation error, and other unknown
reasons, but not LT.
3. Phenomenons explained by SR really exist, but SR is not a precise
prediction. Because constants of SR equations are unable to be
accurately verified due to huge energy emission.

Best regards
Chenmou

Very good Chenmou. You are a fast learner.

I would add:
4. Any correct predictions of relativity are purely coincidental.
5. To understand reality, we have to eliminate the need to communicate with
light. That can be done by using an array of synched clocks to perform all
measurements. This simulates an instantaneous universe in which simultaneirty
is absolute for all frames.


Correct assumption implies correct conception and derivation.
Do you agree with my statement?

Which one?


Best regards

Chenmou


Henri Wilson.
See the Stupidity of Relativity.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm


Henri Wilson.
See the Stupidity of Relativity.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm