$100 reward

**Dwhig265** · #1 September 9th 03 posted to sci.physics.relativity

bject: $100 reward
From: CC
Date: 9/8/03 6:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article , Dwhig265
wrote:

I have been publishing and copyrighting various versions of this theory
since
1990. This one is hereby copyrighted, all rights reserved, by myself, Dwain
W.
Higginbotham, Miami, Fla. USA, 2 September 2003.

Dwain, if you've been pursuing this since 1990 you've wasted 13 years
plus. There's no such thing as an absolute rest frame. The problem is
that you can't see past your prejudices and beliefs. Physics should be
approached like Euclid approached geometry. That is, physics can be
deduced from a small number of axioms.

CC
Dwh says: Your saying that doesn't make it so. I've been at it over 40 years
and I think I'm on the right track. It takes something like magic to try to
explain why we can see superluminal galaxies in opposite directions unless
theres a center, and relativity just doesn't cut it, particularly when one of
the main postulates is that nothing can travel faster than light. Thanks for
your interest and civil tone.

CC · #2 September 10th 03 posted to sci.physics.relativity

In article , Dwhig265
wrote:

bject: $100 reward
From: CC
Date: 9/8/03 6:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Message-id:

In article , Dwhig265
wrote:

I have been publishing and copyrighting various versions of this theory
since
1990. This one is hereby copyrighted, all rights reserved, by myself, Dwain
W.
Higginbotham, Miami, Fla. USA, 2 September 2003.

Dwain, if you've been pursuing this since 1990 you've wasted 13 years
plus. There's no such thing as an absolute rest frame. The problem is
that you can't see past your prejudices and beliefs. Physics should be
approached like Euclid approached geometry. That is, physics can be
deduced from a small number of axioms.

CC
Dwh says: Your saying that doesn't make it so. I've been at it over 40 years
and I think I'm on the right track. It takes something like magic to try to
explain why we can see superluminal galaxies in opposite directions unless
theres a center, and relativity just doesn't cut it, particularly when one of
the main postulates is that nothing can travel faster than light. Thanks for
your interest and civil tone.

You're right. Just my saying that doesn't make it so. But if it is so
then my not saying it cannot make it not so. People often pursue a
false dream for 40 years or more. It doesn't take magic to interpret
the effects which are attributed to superluminal galaxy motion or
superluminal jets but only a rational understanding that those sources
are not extragalactic objects or that systems we interpret as galaxies
are not galaxies after all. Measuring distances of light sources has
always been problematic and the only certain measurments involves the
use of parallax and our instrumentation isn't but about 90 percent
accurate at the distance of the nearest star Alpha Centauri. This
accuracy begins to fall off rapidly with increasing distance so that
without a standard candle there's just no way to determine how far
distance objects really are. The astronomical community would like to
assure you that they have this all tied up but there are so many
variables and assumptions that their pronouncements are not worth very
much.

CC

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
$100 reward	Dwhig265	The Theory of Relativity	22	September 7th 03 10:46 PM
$100 reward	Dwhig265	The Theory of Relativity	3	September 7th 03 07:20 PM
$100 reward	Bilge	The Theory of Relativity	1	September 6th 03 10:48 AM
$100 reward	AllYou!	The Theory of Relativity	0	September 5th 03 07:27 PM
$100 reward	Dirk Van de moortel	The Theory of Relativity	1	September 5th 03 02:47 PM