Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #583131

Re: Annotated version of SRT

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/17/2022 3:04 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 16.04.2022 um 21:59 schrieb JanPB:
>> On Saturday, April 16, 2022 at 1:23:06 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 16.04.2022 um 00:46 schrieb JanPB:
>>>> On Friday, April 15, 2022 at 9:29:29 AM UTC-7, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 14.04.2022 um 17:42 schrieb Odd Bodkin:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone who is interested in promoting their own furniture that 
>>>>>> competes
>>>>>> with IKEA is going to dump the contents of an IKEA kit, complain 
>>>>>> that the
>>>>>> bags containing the bolts are not labeled with standard sizes, will
>>>>>> deliberately lose the hex key and complain that it wasn’t fastened 
>>>>>> down,
>>>>>> complain that if there are three identical wooden parts they 
>>>>>> aren’t labeled
>>>>>> A, B, C or A1, A2, A3.
>>>>> What I'm actually very good at, that are such mechanical tasks like to
>>>>> assemble an IKEA shelve.
>>>>>
>>>>> I cannot really prove it. But just take my word for that.
>>>>>> Likewise, TH has a desire to promote his own ideas that compete with
>>>>>> relativity, and so he’s going to take a relativity paper and dump 
>>>>>> out the
>>>>>> contents on the floor and have lots of complaints that it’s 
>>>>>> unusable for
>>>>>> idiots, where idiots were not the intended audience of the relativity
>>>>>> paper.
>>>>> I'm not at all against relativity. I have analyzed a certain paper and
>>>>> have presented my results. This paper has some connections to
>>>>> relativity, but is not relativity itself.
>>>>
>>>> It's a paper that defined relativity. Other than that it has some
>>>> connections to relativity.
>>> Relativity is way older than even Einstein.
>>
>> By "relativity" on this NG we mean Einstein's 1905 theory.
> 
> Definetely not.
> 
> 'Relativity' is actually a very trivial concept and most likely nobody 
> would disagree.
> 
> But it started with Gillieo or even further.
> 
> Whether or not Einstein has something useful to say about the topic, 
> that is a question of debate.
> 
>>> But it case of Einstein's 'on the electrodynics of moving bodies' we had
>>> to analyse the ancestors of this theory, too.
>>>
>>> We had, for instance, Hendrik Lorentz and Henri Poincaré, who wrote
>>> about similar topics.
>>>
>>> But far more interesting is actually Heinrich Hertz.
>>>
>>> He wrote about the distribution of electric fields a longish book.
> 
> 
> see here
> 
> https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Untersuchungen_%C3%BCber_die_Ausbreitung_der_elektrischen_Kraft 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately I don't know, if that book was translated into English.
> 
> 
>>> Chapter 14 had the title (in German) like 'About the basic equations of
>>> the electrodynamics of moving bodies'.
>>>
>>> That sounds familliar, doesn't it?
>>>
>>> Also a number of equations and basic concepts seem to stem from there.
>>>
>>> The book is remarkably well written, and combines great experimental
>>> care with great mathematical and physical skills.
>>>
>>> Now Hertz wasn't forgottten, because he was actually a hero in physics
>>> and invented radio waves. But his theory about the aether is wastly
>>> forgotten, from which Einstein was apparently inspired.
>>
>> In the sense that Einstein's theory does not depend on aether.
> 
> 
> Heinrich Hertz was an 'aetherist' and developed equations to describe 
> the aether.
> 
> Now Einstein took these equations and used them to disprove the 
> existence of an aether.



http://www.hc10.eu/pdf/The%20speech%20by%20Albert%20Einstein.pdf




>>> That is in fact odd, because Einstein took the equations about the
>>> behaviour of the aether from Hertz and 'proved', that aether would not
>>> exist.
>>
>> Einstein did not "prove" that. Instead, he created a theory which is 
>> agnostic
>> wrt aether.
> 
> 
> He used equations of Hertz, which meant 'aether', hence cannot derive 
> the non-existence with such equations.
> 
> The prerequisites of his derivation were 'inherited' from Hertz, because 
> he used his equations.
> 
> 
> 
>>>>> The results prove nothing about relativity, because errors prove
>>>>> nothing, not right and not wrong.
>>>>
>>>> There are no errors in that paper.
>>>>
>>> At least the lack of a reference to used material was bad science, at 
>>> best.
>>
>> No, it was a standard practice back then. Go to a good science library 
>> and
>> flip through issues or Annalen der Physik from about that year. Or other
>> physics journals. You'll see lots of papers in them that list no 
>> references.
>> The readers knew very well what lines of inspiration were relevant
>> without writing it explicitly (as is the fashion today when even someone
>> mentioning something to you over a beer gets listed as "private 
>> communication").
> 
> He did not just use a few equations.
> 
> TH
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-13 07:49 +0200
  Re: Annotated version of SRT Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2022-04-13 07:41 +0000
    Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-14 08:21 +0200
      Re: Annotated version of SRT Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-04-14 14:38 +0200
        Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-14 07:47 -0700
        Re: Annotated version of SRT Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2022-04-14 15:26 +0000
          Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-14 15:42 +0000
            Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-15 18:29 +0200
              Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-15 17:00 +0000
              Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-15 15:46 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-16 10:23 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-16 12:59 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-04-16 23:13 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-17 10:04 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-04-17 04:46 -0500
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-17 17:11 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-18 09:33 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-04-18 12:38 +0000
                Re: Annotated version of SRT nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-04-18 16:05 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-18 09:24 -0700
                Crank Thomas Heger perseveres (in his imbecility) "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-04-18 08:49 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-18 13:02 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-19 09:29 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-19 01:03 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-19 11:42 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2022-04-19 03:01 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-19 03:33 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-04-19 11:05 -0400
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-04-19 08:25 -0700
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-04-21 08:53 +0200
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Reinhardt Behm <rbehm@hushmail.com> - 2022-04-21 13:13 +0000
                Re: Annotated version of SRT Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-04-21 07:32 -0700

csiph-web