In 1919 Karl Popper found it suitable to start worshipping at the
portrait of Albert Einstein because, unlike Marxism and psychoanalysis,
the theory of relativity produced unambiguous results that could be
tested experimentally. I suspect Popper was particularly impressed by
Chapter 23 in Einstein's "Relativity" where Einstein offers a few
confusions to the reader but the final result is unambiguous indeed:
the observer at rest measures the periphery of the rotating disc to be
LONGER than the periphery of a non-rotating disc. This result
contradicts the unambiguous concept of length contraction according to
which the observer at rest should measure the moving length to be
SHORTER than the length at rest. In other words, both discoveries of
Einstein - that the moving length is longer (LENGTH DILATION) and that
the moving length is shorter (LENGTH CONTRACTION) - are unambiguous and
can be tested experimentally. Popper went into convulsions any time he
remembered this particular unambiguity of Einstein's theory.

Other relativists have considerably contributed to the unambiguity. So
Ehrenfest discovered that the rotating periphery is SHORTER, in
accordance with the unambiguous concept of length contraction. That is,
Ehrenfest rejected the unambiguous concept of length dilation
introduced by Einstein. A third group of relativists unambiguously say
that the length of the rotating periphery is EQUAL to the length of the
non-rotating periphery and so reject the unambiguous concepts of
Einstein and Ehrenfest. Clearly, Popper's conclusion that relativity is
science and Marxism and psychoanalysis are pseudo-sciences is
justified.

Pentcho Valev

And......does any of that help to put food on the table????

wrote:
And......does any of that help to put food on the table????

Aincha heard of the loaves and fishes?????