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

"kenseto" wrote in message ...
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


But:

| Some troubling assumptions of SRT:
| 1. SRT assumes that the leading edge (the first photon) of a
| light ray send from a source toward a detector will hit the
| detector. All the SRT math is based on this assumption. This
| assumption is troubling because it would mean that the
| velocity and the position of the leading edge (the first
| photon) of the light ray is known. This is a clear violation
| of the Uncertainty Principle.
|
| 2. SRT posits that the speed of light is a universal
| constant. The speed of light in any frame is 299,792,458m/1
| clock second. This suggests that a clock must also be an
| interval of universal time. However, SRT also asserts that
| the passage of a clock second in one frame does not
| correspond to the passage of a clock second in another
| frame. This suggests that a clock second is not an interval
| of universal time.
|
| It appears that SRT is making contradictory assumptions.
|
| Ken Seto

It appears that IRT contains a subset that is making contradictory
assumptions

Dirk Vdm

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! 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.

"Sam Wormley" wrote in message
news:Imuhf.570927$x96.345042@attbi_s72...
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.

Hey wormy the first two postulates of IRT are identical to these SR
postulates??? So what is the point of your puny mind???
Wormy is a runt of the SR experts.
Definition for a runt of the SR experts:
A moron who thinks that SR is a religion. An idiot who doesn't
know the limitations of SR. A mental midget who can't comprehend
beyond what he was taught in school. An imbecile who follows
the real experts around like a puppy and eats up their **** like
gourmet puppy chow. An Asshole who will attack anybody who
disagrees with SR

Ken Seto



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! 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.

kenseto wrote:


Hey wormy the first two postulates of IRT are identical to these SR
postulates??? So what is the point of your puny mind???
Wormy is a runt of the SR experts.
Definition for a runt of the SR experts:
A moron who thinks that SR is a religion. An idiot who doesn't
know the limitations of SR. A mental midget who can't comprehend
beyond what he was taught in school. An imbecile who follows
the real experts around like a puppy and eats up their **** like
gourmet puppy chow. An Asshole who will attack anybody who
disagrees with SR


Seto, you really should spend some time studing relativity.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic..._booklist.html

"Daddy, why is there anything at all?????"

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.

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.

"Schoenfeld" wrote in message
oups.com...

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.

I have Adobe Acrobat 6.0 and it loaded OK for me. Perhaps you try again. The
paper is too long and it contains diagrams and equations. So it is not
practical to post it on usenet. I can e-mail you a pdf copy if you still
have problem.

Ken Seto

"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