Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity

From	Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity
Date	2019-02-14 13:54 +1100
Message-ID	<gck3j2F3aqjU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<47fd56bd-177d-4a45-8c43-1f48d96f8b54@googlegroups.com> <gchd0tFfltqU1@mid.individual.net> <9b9297f5-b849-4676-b20c-ec61b19a80ea@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 14/02/2019 1:18 pm, mitchrae3323@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 12, 2019 at 6:17:05 PM UTC-8, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 12/02/2019 10:02 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>> All consequences of Einstein's false constant-speed-of-light postulate are absurd, even idiotic, so Einstein's relativity can be disproved logically, through reductio ad absurdum. Here is a length contraction idiocy:
>>>
>>> "Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity"  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg
>>
>> You know very well that there are no contradictions in SR, so what's the
>> point?
>>
>> Sylvia.
> 
> Space contraction is a contradiction both universal and local.

You may not like it, but it not a mathematical contradiction, which is 
the issue here. The theory could be attacked on the basis that its 
predictions to not match experimental results, but for that to happen, 
there have to be actual experiments. What Valev is trying to do is to 
show that it couldn't possibly match experimental results because it 
predicts two different results for the same experiment. But, as usual, 
he is mistaken. It doesn't do that. Valev has just failed to apply it 
correctly.

Sylvia.

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

Thread

Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-12 03:02 -0800
  Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-12 07:18 -0800
    Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-12 11:30 -0800
  Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-02-13 13:17 +1100
    Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity "nuny@bid.nes" <alien8752@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 10:13 -0800
    Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-13 20:17 -0500
    Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2019-02-13 18:18 -0800
      Re: Logical (Non-Experimental) Refutations of Einstein's relativity Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2019-02-14 13:54 +1100

csiph-web