Not really. You can’t do physics without being competent in the math.
Period. I’m sorry, but this is a fact. Math skills are a prerequisite.
Having a logical mind is not sufficient for doing physics.
This does not put physics above mere mortals. I’m a mere mortal. I took the
time to learn the math and learn the physics. Taking that time is not above
mere mortals.
you’ll find that’s commonly true here.
Go ahead and sniff.
Post by everything isallliesI've stated that there are problems in Einsteins theory and you don't care.
That's what we are up to now, you could care less if the paper on SRT is
absolutely riddled with errors.
i.e. "who cares it Einstein or special relativity is right or wrong?"
Well the issue then is that your next statement is nonsense: "To date, it
{SRT} has been Vindicated by all experiments. And that is what counts.
Special relativity is a model that currently still works. So we'll use
this model since it is useful."
You see, if the hypothesis is nonsensical gibberish, then how come it
all magically worked out just fine with those claimed experimental evidences?
Was it divine providence that in a moment of drunken delusion, Einstein
scribbled down utter tripe but someone thought to run some experiment
that proved that the tripe actually gave correct results?
Wow, that's a miracle. So you see that its IS critical that any
examination of Einsteins Hypothesis MUST be able to stand any test for
rational content and logical stability. If it full of errors, then we
have to agree a holy miracle of the supernatural was at work.
Now I hate to inform you but those examples of experimental verification
for SRT are full of shit.
None of them can stand scrutiny, they all rely on some form of circular
reasoning, and cherry picking the data.
GPS doesn't need STR as claimed. The thing you fail to realise is that
this is a deception of people who don't want an educated population, they
want a dumbed down controllable population, as can be easily seen today,
take a look outside. SRT and GR are deliberate red herrings, inserted
into science in order to basically confuse everyone, meanwhile Im sure
that the elites do possess the real knowledge, and because knowledge is
power , they don't what you to have it.
But anyway, the fact remains that if it can be shown that Einstein's work
is nonsensical, then no, you don't get to keep hold of the theories. They
too are deceptive rubbish, holding science back, not allowing any
advancement in the right direction.
So is an explanation necessary? Hell yes. Einstein has been challenged
and if you are Einsteins God, (you surely act like an all knowing god )
then its up to you to defend his claims.
Post by rotchmUp until Einstein's hypothesis, all measurements of the speed of light
all gave the same value. This is an empirical fact.
No god, it's not an empirical fact at all.
First, to accurately measure the speed of any moving thing, you must
conduct a one way trial, between two known locations but no such test has
ever been done and indeed can never be done. You can only claim that you
have conducted a TWO way test, out to a reflector, then back to the
source location. But here remains a possibility that the velocity in one
direction may be different than the other, and all you have is an average
speed, not an exact velocity.
Aside from the observation of the moon IO, every other experiment was not
actually timing a photon in its travel over some measured distance. no,
what all tests are observing is the interference pattern caused when a
series of gaps in a disk (for example) fail to coincide with a light beam
that is returning from a distant mirror.
So then all you are measuring is not the speed of a photon, but the
frequency of the waves of the light.
To measure the speed of light you would need to send a single short pulse
of light and time its travel over a set distance. This has never been done.
And the observation related to IO are not only explainable by a travel
time for light. The changes are real enough, but are still small and need
to be considered as cumulative readings to get anywhere.
There are a great many factors involved in celestial observations from
Earth, and not the least of which would be the reliance of the IO
observations on the principal that light travels in straight lines.
Einsteins claims that it does not, as all spacetime is curved. So
watching something that SEEMS to be over there, is only an illusion, it's
someplace else. Additionally, Einsteins also claims that Roemer's time
piece (clock) does not maintain accurate intervals because its travelling
at speed relative to IO, as the Earth circles the Sun. So of course he
must get different time readings for these reasons plus probably others
we have not even considered.
You can';t hang on to Roemer's belief that its possible to measure the
speed of light by this method. And anyway, his result was no where near
the currently accepted number, which was decided by a committee decree,
not any actual experiment, as they kept getting DIFFERENT readings!
But this is not important as what you and your bum buddy Einstein claim
is that not only does the speed of light always remains stable, but
further and without any explanation, you both insist that I can take a
measure of ligh speed while stand still, or moving toward the light or
away, and STILL get the very same result, as if I was not moving at all!
even though I can prove I was moving.
Do you really think this is a rationally sound position to embrace?
Really? Clearly you do, because you are a little god, and know all, so do
tell, how does such a condition come about, where regardless of my speed
relative to what I'm measuring, I could still get the same result?
Can you explain this without calling up Zeus or Thor or Santa, or the tooth fairy?