Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #373149
| Path | csiph.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Sat, 02 Jan 2016 18:11:32 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <56886745.1C3@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
| Date | Sat, 02 Jan 2016 16:11:49 -0800 |
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
| Reply-To | starmaker@ix.netcom.com |
| X-Mailer | Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? |
| References | <fa826916-9070-42d1-9f10-f60ca9318a33@googlegroups.com> <be0dd52e-84e1-4665-bdea-e786248b86df@googlegroups.com> <20151228181331.52cbcdc1b1adf4a24b221fe6@g{oogle}mail.com> <429892e7-9c02-40a3-ab99-51fdadf4eed2@googlegroups.com> <20151229185059.5965e25f3170bc0fbc93b730@g{oogle}mail.com> <7281546d-bf2c-4160-b845-e2375142770e@googlegroups.com> <20151230134827.c7a719254458a7a8f45902bb@g{oogle}mail.com> <50f4e7e6-5fd5-4734-9aad-0ddc0313c41a@googlegroups.com> <20151231151601.afc224422b374bc526bb55a9@gmail.com> <ybidnfO71LUr2hjLnZ2dnUU7_8ydnZ2d@giganews.com> <n63juj$goi$1@speranza.aioe.org> <67e736a3-959c-4752-8ac0-4df5b222a8ae@googlegroups.com> <56884AF0.22C9@ix.netcom.com> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Lines | 62 |
| X-Usenet-Provider | http://www.giganews.com |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 162.239.141.5 |
| X-Trace | sv3-NO9Q1mpdc7Ps3k7S5haCxDBdFk2xo/5TDqPwKWHcdUboYWfWN+/UYSBatlPgckTGInaWP6AcaiQxyPk!E9VIKwB50seDAZCs4SiYSpksrTbUAp5N+guGet8a/zGG5Ul7dSgTG0DhmIEw9oIsw3NmZwU/0KTK!sKcwak0L |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly |
| X-Postfilter | 1.3.40 |
| X-Original-Bytes | 4260 |
| X-Received-Bytes | 4372 |
| X-Received-Body-CRC | 2885597429 |
| Xref | csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:373149 |
Show key headers only | View raw
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> JanPB wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday, December 31, 2015 at 8:08:57 AM UTC-8, Kathleen Winder wrote:
> > > Tom Roberts wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 12/31/15 12/31/15 6:16 AM, Anton Shepelev wrote:
> > > >> [SR] said nothing whatsoever about non-intertial frames of
> > > >> reference. They are out of its scope.
> > > >
> > > > This is not true. SR can handle non-inertial "frames" just fine [#]. But
> > > > if one wants to relate a set of non-inertial coordinates to the
> > > > coordinates of an inertial frame, or to some other set of non-inertial
> > > > coordinates, one must use a transform specific to the two coordinate
> > > > systems -- the Lorentz transform will not do that.
> > >
> > > That's probably why SR is deeply controversial. There is nothing about
> > > electricity in "The Electrodynamics of the Moving Bodies". He must had
> > > been having another theory and misspelled the titles.
> >
> > On the contrary, that paper was really about electrodynamics. It is only thanks to a certain
> > accident of history that the TOOLS Einstein develops in this paper in order to explain
> > a certain conceptual anomaly of Maxwell's electrodynamics turned out MORE important,
> > more general, and more revolutionary than the subject they were originally designed for.
> >
> > Hence the title of the paper. The second part of the paper ("the electrodynamics part")
> > is what Einstein is concentrating on while the first part ("the kinematical part") is "merely"
> > setting up certain tools for that.
> >
> > Since 1905 these "tools"(#) have become so standard that nowadays hardly anyone even
> > BOTHERS to read the second part of Einstein's paper anymore. Certainly none of the
> > Einstein "critics" on this newsgroup have done so (assuming they could understand it
> > in the first place, which I doubt).
> >
> > (#) called "special relativity" for historical reasons although the term "Einsteinian mechanics"
> > would be far more appropriate.
> >
> > --
> > Jan
>
> Isn't about time you get pass Einstein? Let me help you...
>
> It is beyond, electrohynamics and Einsteinian mechanics...
>
> it is Electrogravity.
>
> In other words, the electric field of gravity sometimes
> acts like a wave, and sometimes acts like a particle.
>
> I hope i don't have to expand on that.
I mean really...yous people seem to be....behind the times.
Yous don't even know Whens the clock go slow.
I have to go back and try to to make it simple by going down a lower
level..
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 02:08 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 05:09 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-29 15:45 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-29 07:43 -0800
Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 06:35 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2015-12-28 18:13 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-28 15:26 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2015-12-29 18:50 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 13:06 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-12-30 11:06 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 15:42 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-12-31 10:02 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 19:18 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-02 14:25 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-02 21:39 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-03 15:22 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 09:27 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-04 20:43 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-04 22:50 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2016-01-05 20:47 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-05 19:31 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-05 20:01 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-05 20:28 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-09 11:44 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:09 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-05 22:18 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 22:41 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-01-05 23:10 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-02 16:45 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2015-12-30 13:48 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 07:17 -0600
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2015-12-30 18:02 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-30 11:22 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? 01405 <0140519@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 11:48 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-30 22:40 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? 01405 <0140519@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 01:21 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-31 14:34 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? 01405 <0140519@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 18:47 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 00:03 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-30 21:15 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 15:40 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-31 13:14 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-30 14:32 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 15:32 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 16:23 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 16:26 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 19:38 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 23:20 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 23:24 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Omar Shabsigh <omar.shabsigh@gmail.com> - 2016-01-03 00:09 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 05:49 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-04 16:59 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-04 08:02 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-04 08:45 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-03 23:14 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 15:36 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 16:30 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-31 00:35 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-30 22:05 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-31 19:11 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 15:16 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-31 14:03 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-31 13:07 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-31 09:20 -0600
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2015-12-31 16:08 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 08:41 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-31 10:57 -0600
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-31 19:33 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 18:50 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-01 11:08 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-01 06:14 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-01 15:30 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-01 06:56 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-01 16:30 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-01 07:54 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-01 16:23 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-01 18:00 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 12:24 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-02 10:46 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2015-12-31 18:59 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? paparios <paparios@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 12:08 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-01-01 08:34 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-01 16:42 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 18:38 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-01-01 11:07 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Kathleen Winder <katwin@mcgatlin.org> - 2016-01-01 15:58 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 12:26 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 14:10 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-01-02 16:11 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 20:06 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-31 15:22 -0600
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.com> - 2016-01-01 02:34 +0300
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-12-31 19:28 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 19:35 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 22:22 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 19:23 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-31 19:21 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-28 07:15 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-28 16:07 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-12-28 21:43 +0100
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-29 11:38 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-28 21:09 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-12-28 22:35 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-12-29 10:38 -0800
Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 02:31 -0800
Re: Is Pentcho's Brain Sane? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 05:07 -0800
Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 15:00 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-30 09:06 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-12-30 11:02 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-30 19:44 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-30 13:26 -0800
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? Waye Kitchens <wscom@complang.net> - 2015-12-30 22:12 +0000
Re: Is Einstein's Relativity Science? kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-12-31 07:41 -0800
csiph-web