kenseto wrote:
"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:LyShf.579571$_o.320709@attbi_s71...

Schoenfeld wrote:

kenseto wrote:


IRT (Improved Relativity Theory) is a new theory of relativity. It

includes

SRT as a subset. However, unlike SRT, the equations of IRT are valid in

all

environments....including gravity. A description of IRT is available in

the

following link (page 4):
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Unification.pdf

Ken Seto


The PDF doesn't load for me (am using Adobe Acrobat 6 professional).
Perhaps you should have an HTML version or just post it directly on
usenet.


It loads for me... but be warned it is contradicted by empirical
data and established physics.


Wormy you are full of ****.....BTW that's why I call you a runt of the SR
experts. Model Mechanics agrees with all existing empirical data and it
includes established physics as subsets.

Ken Seto




Even your first page is full of contradiction.... It would be rejected
by scientific journal...

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 02:08:40 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:

kenseto wrote:
IRT (Improved Relativity Theory) is a new theory of relativity. It includes
SRT as a subset. However, unlike SRT, the equations of IRT are valid in all
environments....including gravity. A description of IRT is available in the
following link (page 4):
http://www.geocities.com/kn_seto/2005Unification.pdf

Ken Seto



The assumption of SR (from the horses mouth) a

They suggest rather that, as has already been shown to (1)
the first order of small quantities, the same laws of
electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames
of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold
good. We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which
will hereafter be called the ``Principle of Relativity'')
to the status of a postulate,

and also introduce another postulate, which is only (2)
apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that
light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of
the emitting body.

These two postulates suffice for the attainment of a
simple and consistent theory of the electrodynamics of
moving bodies based on Maxwell's theory for stationary
bodies.

__________________________


Everything we can measure is accurately modeled by either
relativity theory or the quantum mechanics. QM, SR or GTR
don't pretend to be theories of everything working is all
domains.

There has NEVER been a prediction of QM, SR or GTR that was
contradicted by an observation. NEVER!

Wormy, there has never been a prediction of islam that was contradicted by
observation....just ask any suicide bomber....

The reason I state
it that way is because we tell students that theories are
good until the are falsified by any single empirical
observation that counters the predictions of the theory.
Yet these theories QM, SR and GTR are remarkably correct
and useful.

I'm convince that you, Seto, have never properly understood SR
and are a tormented bag of molecules because you have failed to
understand SR.


HW.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
see: www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe

"Sometimes I feel like a complete failure.
The most useful thing I have ever done is prove Einstein wrong".