Path: csiph.com!feeder.erje.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: This is How it Happened...Summary Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:37:16 +0000 (UTC) Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 Lines: 26 Message-ID: References: <003f534d-deaa-496c-a65a-19928ec41619@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1468258636 4336 192.74.137.71 (11 Jul 2016 17:37:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:37:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: nn/6.6.5 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:387592 kenseto writes: >On Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 9:26:29 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 7/9/2016 3:15 PM, kenseto wrote: >> > An inertial frame is just another name for the ether. If not you tell me the >> > difference in properties between an inertial frame and a location in the stationary ether. >> That's simple. There is ONE stationary ether frame. There are MILLIONS >> of inertial frames. >You are wrong..... He is wrong. There aren't "MILLIONS" of inertial frames, there are an infinite number of them! All with any velocity you want, as long as it is constant and less than c. >there are zillions of locations in the stationary ether that have >the same proposed properties as an inertial frame. The speed of >light in any location of the stationary ether is isotropic c and >the laws of physics are the same in any location in the stationary >ether. But what about in all of those infinite number of inertial frames which have a nonzero velocity with respect to the aether frame? Do you even know the definition of an inertial frame?