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> Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2016 16:11:49 -0800 From: The Starmaker 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: <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> <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 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..