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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #623279 > unrolled thread

Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Scientists failed to  understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-23 10:42 -0700
    Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2023-10-23 10:54 -0700
    Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-10-23 13:22 -0500
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 15:33 -0700
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-10-27 18:01 -0500
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 16:57 -0700
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 23:27 -0700
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-30 13:15 -0700
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Jean Shakhbanov <anbn@bnssbask.ss> - 2023-10-30 20:54 +0000
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 08:32 -0700
                Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Jhon Jhairo Tomashov <jnjh@aviohvha.jo> - 2023-11-01 16:36 +0000
                Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Dimingo Bakunoff <ifka@fauofnko.oi> - 2023-11-01 16:47 +0000
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Nicholas Batunov <scso@ivonthou.aa> - 2023-10-28 12:46 +0000
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 05:56 -0800
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Witar Bagimoff <aatm@ramamtrw.bw> - 2023-11-05 15:03 +0000
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-11-05 09:03 -0600
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 08:20 -0800
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Michaes Yakuba <hiku@uasyhauk.is> - 2023-11-05 17:05 +0000
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-11-05 21:33 -0600
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:59 -0800
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 08:52 -0800
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemove@kevinaylward.co.uk> - 2023-11-23 20:23 +0000
                Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-11-29 22:07 -0600
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 09:30 -0800
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-11-05 21:35 -0600
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-11-05 21:57 -0800
                Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-11-06 12:35 -0500
                  Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 10:04 -0800
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Mike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net> - 2023-11-06 15:52 -0700
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-11-06 17:36 -0600
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-11-06 22:48 -0800
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Mike Fontenot <mlfasf@comcast.net> - 2023-11-08 12:58 -0700
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Drake Badanov <roen@kvvodbaa.rb> - 2023-11-07 00:14 +0000
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-07 14:52 -0800
    Re: Scientists failed to  understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Romano Baibikov <koko@ooroonon.ao> - 2023-10-23 18:56 +0000
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-10-23 15:19 -0400
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Bernabe Badanoff <ndab@faaabnbn.en> - 2023-10-23 19:52 +0000
    Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-10-24 02:48 -0700
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 15:41 -0700
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 20:55 -0700
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-10-28 00:07 -0700
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 08:23 -0700
          Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 13:12 -0700
            Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Jon Michael Jatzyshin <moin@snajanli.nc> - 2023-11-01 21:42 +0000
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-11-01 20:13 -0700
              Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-03 08:32 -0700
                Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Shain Baumgarten <gnii@eaehssaa.ma> - 2023-11-03 16:14 +0000
                  Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-11-04 06:08 -0700
                    Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Rigoberto Marholenko <root@rtobotll.bg> - 2023-11-04 20:22 +0000
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-30 12:46 -0700
    Re: Scientists failed to  understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an  incomplete theory of relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-10-25 23:00 -0700
      Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-10-27 16:33 -0700
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity Theofane Beltsov <atlo@tnoveovt.eb> - 2023-10-28 13:02 +0000
        Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-10-29 01:36 -0700

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#623478 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Saturday, 28 October 2023 at 05:55:20 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 3:41:23 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:49:01 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote: 
> > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 10:42:36 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > > > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 
> > > > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space 
> > > SR makes no such assumption.ow come 
> > 
> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower rate of 1/gamma?
> It doesn't run at a slower rate. Its rate is measured to be slower by a different 
> clock.

Nope, poor lying idiot. Clocks of GPS satellites run at the 
rate +4 compared to  clocks of Earth, anyone can check.



> The source of this phenomenon is unknown

The source of the "phenomenon" are sick delusions of an insane
crazie.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623612 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:55:20 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 3:41:23 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:49:01 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote: 
> > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 10:42:36 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > > > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 
> > > > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space 
> > > SR makes no such assumption.ow come 
> > 
> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower rate of 1/gamma?
> It doesn't run at a slower rate. Its rate is measured to be slower by a different 
> clock. (Reread the last sentence until you see why this is a very different claim 
> that the sentence preceding it.) 

SR math says that it  runs at a slower rate compared to your clock.
> 
 The source of this phenomenon is unknown, all we know so far is that it can be 
> modelled mathematically in terms of certain geometry. The immediately observable 
> "reason" is that the speed of light is in a certain well-defined experimental 
> sense an invariant. 
 The source of this phenomena is due to the different clocks are in different states of absolute motions.
> 
> Einstein was the first to notice this correlation. Physicists before him thought 
> only that there was something peculiar about Maxwell's equations, and they quantified 
> this peculiarity. But they didn't see the more direct correlation with space and time. 

Einstein failed to include absolute motion of the two clocks.
> 
> -- 
> Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623627 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 11:55:20 PM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Friday, October 27, 2023 at 3:41:23 PM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:49:01 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote: 
> > > On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 10:42:36 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: 
> > > > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 
> > > > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space 
> > > SR makes no such assumption.ow come 
> > 
> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower rate of 1/gamma?
> It doesn't run at a slower rate.   of 1/gamma

It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your clock (the SR observer.)
> Its rate is measured to be slower by a different/
> clock. (Reread the last sentence until you see why this is a very different claim 
> that the sentence preceding it.) 

How do you measure the rate f a remote clock?
> 
> The source of this phenomenon is unknown, 
It is known.....it is due to different states of absolute motion between the two clocks.

>all we know so far is that it can be s
> modelled mathematically in terms of certain geometry. The immediately observable 
> "reason" is that the speed of light is in a certain well-defined experimental 
> sense an invariant. 
> 
> Einstein was the first to notice this correlation. Physicists before him thought 
> only that there was something peculiar about Maxwell's equations, and they quantified 
> this peculiarity. But they didn't see the more direct correlation with space and time. 
used to include absolute
Einstein failed because he refused to include the effects of absolute motion.
> 
> -- 
> Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623629 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:

>> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
>> > rate of 1/gamma?
>> It doesn't run at a slower rate.   of 1/gamma
> 
> It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your
> clock (the SR observer.)

that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.


 𝗧𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘆_𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘃:_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆_𝗶𝘀_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱_𝗯𝘆_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗵𝘆𝗽𝗼𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘆
 𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗶𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹-𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁
Current leaders in North America and Western Europe are destroying the 
system that underpinned their own prosperity 
https://r%74.com/news/586380-global-majority-is-shocked/

Thanks God there is the global majority who can still think straight.

Soon once the Zionists and their slaves are defeated in the battlefield of 
the Middle East, the dominoes will start falling, their empire of lies and 
hypocrisy will end and a far better world will emerge.

Majority of the genocides committed in this world was done by the west and 
it's not surprising to see them sponsoring isreali genocide.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623637 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 2:42:56 PM UTC-7, Jon Michael Jatzyshin wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote: 
> 
> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower 
> >> > rate of 1/gamma? 
> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma 
> > 
> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your 
> > clock (the SR observer.)

Gamma slow time is manifesting. It is part of space travel.
Aging slow makes contact's distance travel more efficient.


Mitchell Raemsch

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623671 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote: 
> 
> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower 
> >> > rate of 1/gamma? 
> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma 
> > 
> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to your 
> > clock (the SR observer.)
> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think. 

Hey  stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
> 
> 
> 𝗧𝗶𝗺𝗼𝗳𝗲𝘆_𝗕𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘃:_𝗧𝗵𝗲_𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹_𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆_𝗶𝘀_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱_𝗯𝘆_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗵𝘆𝗽𝗼𝗰𝗿𝗶𝘀𝘆 
> 𝗼𝗳_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗶𝗻_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗜𝘀𝗿𝗮𝗲𝗹-𝗣𝗮𝗹𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘁  face....
> Current leaders in North America and Western Europe are destroying the 
> system that underpinned their own prosperity 
> https://r%74.com/news/586380-global-majority-is-shocked/ 
> 
> Thanks God there is the global majority who can still think straight. 
> 
> Soon once the Zionists and their slaves are defeated in the battlefield of 
> the Middle East, the dominoes will start falling, their empire of lies and 
> hypocrisy will end and a far better world will emerge. 
> 
> Majority of the genocides committed in this world was done by the west and 
> it's not surprising to see them sponsoring isreali genocide.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623674 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:

> On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin
> wrote:
>> Ken Seto wrote:
>> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower
>> >> > rate of 1/gamma?
>> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma
>> > 
>> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to
>> > your clock (the SR observer.)
>> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think.
> 
> Hey  stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
> 1/gamma is not a slower rate?

you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it, you 
fucking uneducated idiot.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623701 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Friday, November 3, 2023 at 12:14:26 PM UTC-4, Shain Baumgarten wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote: 
> 
> > On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 at 5:42:56 PM UTC-4, Jon Michael Jatzyshin 
> > wrote: 
> >> Ken Seto wrote: 
> >> >> > Then how come a clock moving wrt the SR observer runs at a slower 
> >> >> > rate of 1/gamma? 
> >> >> It doesn't run at a slower rate. of 1/gamma 
> >> > 
> >> > It does. It accumulates clock seconds at a rate 1/gamma) compare to 
> >> > your clock (the SR observer.) 
> >> that's not the same thing, you stupid fuck. Think. 
> > 
> > Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of 
> > 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
> you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it, you 
> fucking uneducated idiot.

I don't have to prove anything to a fuck face like you. You prove that a clock running 
 at a rate of 1/gamma is not running slow.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623706 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:

>> > Hey stupid fuck face.......so accumulating clock second at a rate of
>> > 1/gamma is not a slower rate?
>> you have to prove it, 𝗮𝘀𝘀_𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗲, by a described procedure. Describe it,
>> you fucking uneducated idiot.
> 
> I don't have to prove anything to a fuck face like you. You prove that a
> clock running at a rate of 1/gamma is not running slow.

stop lying to the american people, you repulsive paraquat. Lisa Hayes is 
not your secretary. Then time passes locally at same rate, disregard 
clocks and watches. I don't need to prove your mother virgin, when it's 
obvious that she is not. Admit your lies and stupidity, and stop lying to 
the american people.

𝗪𝗲_𝘄𝗼𝗻’𝘁_𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗸_𝘁𝗼_𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮 – Zelensky 
https://r%74.com/ru%73%73ia/586590-zelensky-will-not-talk-russia/

He's kinda reminiscent of Adolf in the final days of WWII...totally 
delusional. Next he'll be ordering non-existent divisions to the Russian 
front.

Zelensky is "whistling past the graveyard" - a graveyard he and his 
Western backers created.

He has killed so many Ukrainians. How can he have any support? He must be 
gone - the sooner the better. But the fucking west, london pigs and 
america, nazified those killed nazis, along a 3 decades, starting 1993.

I'm pretty sure, that he ordered censorship of all media, and now he 
believes the Ukrainian media 100%!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623557 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Tuesday, October 24, 2023 at 5:49:01 AM UTC-4, JanPB wrote:
> On Monday, October 23, 2023 at 10:42:36 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote:
> > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 
> > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space
> SR makes no such assumption.

So an SR observer doesn't say that a clock moving wrt him is accumulating clock second at a slower rate of 1/gamma????
What does SR say?

> > (the aether or the E-Matrix). And thus every SR observer faultily assumes that a clock moving wrt him is running slower.
> Therefore, N/A.
> > In real life a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate of 1/gamma or faster rate of gamma.
> N/A.


> > 2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
> You are wasting your time. 

SR is  superseded by IRT.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623380 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:
> 
> Their failures are  based on the following faulty assumptions:
> 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space (the aether or the E-Matrix). And thus every SR observer faultily assumes that  a clock moving wrt him is running slower. In real life a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate of 1/gamma or faster rate of gamma.
> 
> 2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
> 
> 3. Please read my book before comment.
> 
> Thank you ,
> Ken Seto
> 
> 

can you post a link, please?


-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623470 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 2:00:01 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> Ken Seto wrote: 
> > 
> > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions: 
> > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space (the aether or the E-Matrix). And thus every SR observer faultily assumes that a clock moving wrt him is running slower. In real life a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate of 1/gamma or faster rate of gamma. 
> > 
> > 2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory. 
> > 
> > 3. Please read my book before comment. 
> > 
> > Thank you , 
> > Ken Seto 
> > 
> >
> can you post a link, please? 
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unmet website that contains the linkaskable, 
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

For reasons unknown, Microsoft destroyed my website  that contains the link for my book. I tried to reactiveate the site but failed.
However, Amazon saw the value of my book and they post my book in their site. I can open their link as follows:
Amazon_Book Online(1).pdf
If you can't get the book in the above link, I can email it to you.

Ken Seto

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623484 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:

>> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
>> and challenge the unchallengeable.
> 
> For reasons unknown, Microsoft destroyed my website  that contains the
> link for my book. I tried to reactiveate the site but failed.

you stupid mathematically lying thief. Lisa Heaven is NOT your secretary, 
you disgusting Japanese.

𝗟𝗲𝘁_𝘂𝘀_𝗻𝗼𝘁_𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗲𝘁_𝗵𝗼𝘄_𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆_𝗽𝘂𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗱_𝘁𝗵𝗲_𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘁𝘀_𝗼𝗻_𝘂𝘀_𝗯𝘂𝘁_𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱_𝗻𝗼𝘁_𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲_𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/3fSgd0f8u3J2

𝗕𝗶𝗴_𝗠𝗶𝗸𝗲..𝗻𝗼𝘁_𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿_𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗿𝘆_𝗱𝘆𝗸𝗲,_𝗕𝗶𝗴_𝗠𝗶𝗸𝗲!_𝗥𝗢𝗙𝗟
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/xGUVKxenR04i

𝗥𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗮_𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝘀_𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗹_𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀_𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺_𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻_𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀_𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱_𝗯𝘆_𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲_𝘁𝗼_𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗮𝗰𝗸_𝗰𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝘀
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/IqV623wuw47s

𝗪𝗲𝘀𝘁_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀_𝗶𝘁_𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱_𝗛𝗮𝗺𝗮𝘀_𝗮𝗻𝗱_𝘂𝘀𝗲𝘀_𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗿𝗼𝗿_𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀_𝗮𝘀_'𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁_𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀'
https://bi%74%63hute.com/video/79emT80JfXuQ

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#623511 — Re: Scientists failed to understand that Einstein's (SRT) is an incomplete theory of relativity

Ken Seto wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 2:00:01 AM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Ken Seto wrote:
> > >
> > > Their failures are based on the following faulty assumptions:
> > > 1. Every SR observer is faultily assumed to be in a state of absolute rest in space (the aether or the E-Matrix). And thus every SR observer faultily assumes that a clock moving wrt him is running slower. In real life a clock moving wrt the observer is accumulating clock seconds at a slower rate of 1/gamma or faster rate of gamma.
> > >
> > > 2. I have formulated a complete theory of relativity called IRT. IRT is included in My book: Model Mechanics :The Final Theory.
> > >
> > > 3. Please read my book before comment.
> > >
> > > Thank you ,
> > > Ken Seto
> > >
> > >
> > can you post a link, please?
> >
> >
> > --
> > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unmet website that contains the linkaskable,
> > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
> > and challenge the unchallengeable.
> 
> For reasons unknown, Microsoft destroyed my website  that contains the link for my book. I tried to reactiveate the site but failed.
> However, Amazon saw the value of my book and they post my book in their site. I can open their link as follows:
> Amazon_Book Online(1).pdf
> If you can't get the book in the above link, I can email it to you.
> 
> Ken Seto


"reactiveate"???? Don't you mean find a host for your website name?

The Truth is you own the website name you, just don't have anybody hosting it now. It's PARKED.


But, telling you dat is hopeless.


Do you still need these files?


http://web.archive.org/web/20211208033204/http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf

http://web.archive.org/web/20161106112001/http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015irt.pdf



(don't tell Bill Gates)





-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web