A Physics forum. Physics Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Physics Banter forum » Physics Newsgroups » The Theory of Relativity
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tags: , , ,

"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 22nd 06 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Tde
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 35
Default "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"

"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"

There have been a significant number of newsposts from individuals who
have equated the suggestion that to assert the existence of the Aether is a
form of charlatanism. These assertions apparently come from the same
individuals who assert that the Special Theory of Relativity has proven that
the Aether does not exist. If they have such a proof, they should present it
since it does not appear to be present in available texts and writings. What
special Relativity does show is that, when observations are limited to those
made with information transfer processes which propagate at a velocity equal
to or less than the speed of light, it is impossible to observe our absolute
velocity through space (i.e.- velocity with respect to the classical Aether.
Only a charlatan would assert that such constitutes a proof that the Aether
does not exist. It should be noted that it is not the proponents of the
Aether who make such a statement, it is the true charlatans, i.e.- the
mathematically trained adherents of conventional physical thought. Dr.
Einstein warned:-"remember gentlemen, we have not proven that the Aether
does not exist, we have merely proven that we do not need it (for
computations)".

The fact of the matter is that, if we accept the Lorentz
Transformations for Length and Time provided by the Special Theory of
Relativity two things become immediately apparent:-

A:- Since the Lorentz Transformation for Velocity, which is length divided
by time, is not unity but rather 1/(1-V^2/C^2) the assertion made by
adherents of Relativity Theory that the velocity of light is the same in all
reference frames can only be true if one uses "rubber" instruments for the
observations, a process which is contrary to all basic principles. The
velocity of light is "a constant" when measured within a given reference
frames. It is not constant for all reference frames when the results of
observations which are corrected by the appropriate Lorentz Transformations
are and transmitted to a common agreed upon "base reference frame". In other
words the velocity of light is "a constant" but it is not necessarily
"constant". Conventional physicists who fail to recognize this distinction
are the true charlatans, not those individuals who are sufficiently astute
to recognize the meaning of the distinction and insist that sound reasoning
be applied to the process.

B:- So far, the only explanation posed for the fact that the velocity of
light is independent of the velocity of its source is that light is a
wavelike disturbance propagating through a medium (e.g.- the classical
Aether) If conventionally trained physicists can provide an alternate
explanation which does not require magic, they should provide it.

C:- The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity shows clearly to an intelligent
mind that it must be possible for an absolute velocity reference frame for
space (e.g.- the classical Aether) to exist.

D:- Once the existence of a single velocity reference frame is shown to be
possible within the confines of Special Relativity, it is possible to devise
a physically realizable experiment which shows that only ONE such reference
frame (e.g.:- the Aether) can exist even if we cannot observe our velocity
with respect to it. (See Section 4.5 of http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm.

Unfortunately it is the mainstream physicists who are the charlatans
and not those who recognize that the thinking of these allegedly mainstream
individuals is screwed up even if where the screwup is not apparent. Those
who would claim the Aether exists are not charlatans, they are individuals
who recognize that mainstream physics is faulty and are looking for a better
set of conclusions.

The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE
ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

E-mail:- . If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.



Ads
  #2  
Old July 24th 06 posted to sci.physics.relativity
surrealistic-dream@hotmail.com
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 754
Default "The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"

Tde wrote:
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism"

There have been a significant number of newsposts from individuals who
have equated the suggestion that to assert the existence of the Aether is a
form of charlatanism. These assertions apparently come from the same
individuals who assert that the Special Theory of Relativity has proven that
the Aether does not exist.


It's the theory one adheres to that tells one (interprets for one) what
one observes. To the extreme positivist (relativist or not), if
something cannot be measured or observed it doesn't meaningfully exist.

If they have such a proof, they should present it
since it does not appear to be present in available texts and writings.


There is no such proof. Physics is not about metaphysics in any case.
Quit arguing about existence or go to a philosophy NG to do so.

What
special Relativity does show is that, when observations are limited to those
made with information transfer processes which propagate at a velocity equal
to or less than the speed of light, it is impossible to observe our absolute
velocity through space (i.e.- velocity with respect to the classical Aether.
Only a charlatan would assert that such constitutes a proof that the Aether
does not exist.


Not a charlatan, but a person with a different philosophical outlook.

It should be noted that it is not the proponents of the
Aether who make such a statement, it is the true charlatans, i.e.- the
mathematically trained adherents of conventional physical thought. Dr.
Einstein warned:-"remember gentlemen, we have not proven that the Aether
does not exist, we have merely proven that we do not need it (for
computations)".


Give reference please.


The fact of the matter is that, if we accept the Lorentz
Transformations for Length and Time provided by the Special Theory of
Relativity two things become immediately apparent:-

A:- Since the Lorentz Transformation for Velocity, which is length divided
by time, is not unity but rather 1/(1-V^2/C^2) the assertion made by
adherents of Relativity Theory that the velocity of light is the same in all
reference frames can only be true if one uses "rubber" instruments for the
observations, a process which is contrary to all basic principles.


When you say "only" it's because you hold to some theory in which you
imagine light propagating through some medium (absolute space) and that
requires you to surmise that instruments are rubberish. It's the theory
of light propagation that you hold to that interprets for you what you
observe.

What if light is neither particle nor wave, but something humanly
unimaginable -- literally -- that just does what it does to conform to
the Light Principle? There is no proof that humans are capable of
inventing mechanical, classical models to explain every phenomena of
Nature.

The
velocity of light is "a constant" when measured within a given reference
frames. It is not constant for all reference frames when the results of
observations which are corrected by the appropriate Lorentz Transformations
are and transmitted to a common agreed upon "base reference frame".


Phyiscs is not about what goes on under the veil.

This is the Light Principle: The measured speed of light in a vacuum as
determined in an inertial frame of reference is a fixed number c. There
are potentially an infinite number of theories that can somehow, with
clever conjurings of the human mind, tell us "why" it is so. And maybe
none of them is true.

In other
words the velocity of light is "a constant" but it is not necessarily
"constant". Conventional physicists who fail to recognize this distinction
are the true charlatans, not those individuals who are sufficiently astute
to recognize the meaning of the distinction and insist that sound reasoning
be applied to the process.

B:- So far, the only explanation posed for the fact that the velocity of
light is independent of the velocity of its source is that light is a
wavelike disturbance propagating through a medium (e.g.- the classical
Aether) If conventionally trained physicists can provide an alternate
explanation which does not require magic, they should provide it.

C:- The Lorentz Transformation for Velocity shows clearly to an intelligent
mind that it must be possible for an absolute velocity reference frame for
space (e.g.- the classical Aether) to exist.


It's possible, but there's more to modern SR than electromagnetism.


D:- Once the existence of a single velocity reference frame is shown to be
possible within the confines of Special Relativity, it is possible to devise
a physically realizable experiment which shows that only ONE such reference
frame (e.g.:- the Aether) can exist even if we cannot observe our velocity
with respect to it. (See Section 4.5 of http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm.


The group nature of the Lorentz transformation makes that impossible.
The laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames (PoR). The laws
account for the behavior of the world as seen from inertial frames. If
some inertial frame is empirically distinguishable from all others by
being tagged with information about its absolute velocity, then there
is some phenomena of a law associated with that frame that is not the
same in all inertial frames. Contradiction. The PoR + covariance of
laws makes it impossible to identify by empirical means any absolute
inertial frame.


Unfortunately it is the mainstream physicists who are the charlatans
and not those who recognize that the thinking of these allegedly mainstream
individuals is screwed up even if where the screwup is not apparent. Those
who would claim the Aether exists are not charlatans, they are individuals
who recognize that mainstream physics is faulty and are looking for a better
set of conclusions.


If both sides would quit arguing sterile metaphysics about what does
and doesn't exist, we'd all be a lot better.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism" Tde Physics - General Discussion 0 July 22nd 06 01:10 PM
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism" Evird Particle Physics 0 January 29th 06 07:14 PM
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism" Orex Physics - General Discussion 6 October 18th 05 12:13 AM
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism" Orex Physics - New Theories 0 October 17th 05 04:27 PM
"The Aether and Charges of Charlatanism" Artlu Physics - General Discussion 2 September 6th 05 07:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2008 Physics Banter, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Mortgages - Mortgage - MPAA - Mortgage - Mortgage Calculator