Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT)

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT)
Date	2016-02-01 17:23 -0600
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<n8opdk$1tro$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<3df6c296-824f-46db-8e4c-1e3301a3a43c@googlegroups.com> <n8mcc6$9ao$1@gioia.aioe.org> <db25b21c-0e21-4aa4-b870-6f222d2737e9@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2/1/2016 3:36 PM, kenseto wrote:
> On Sunday, January 31, 2016 at 8:28:45 PM UTC-5, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 1/31/2016 10:26 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>> IRT is a new theory of relativity. It includes  LET and SRT as subsets. It has an
>>> unlimited domain of applicability. Therefore it is suitable for use to replace
>>> SRT/GRT in all applications. A paper on IRT is available in the following link:
>>> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015irt.pdf
>>>
>>
>> At this point I just want to say how amused I am that you seriously
>> think that the math of quantum electrodynamics can be explained
>> alternately with an explanation involving angels.
>
> 1. Angel explanation is designed to make fun of the virtual particle/field explanation of the QED math.

Didn't seem to make fun of anyone but you.

> 2. Model Mechanics explanation of the QED math: directions of Absolute motions of the interacting
> particles (or objects) in the E-Matrix give rise to the attractive or repulsive forces and the electric
> charge of a particle is not the intrinsic properties of the particle. This avoids the infinity problem of QED.

And does no better a job of connecting to QED math than the angels 
explanation.

> 3. Collapse of wave function in the Schrodinger equation can be replaced by the absolute motion of the
> detector moving wrt the wave transmitting E-Strings.
>
>>
>> This shows to me your complete disdain for the scientific method and a
>> complete lack of understanding of how scientific theories work. You
>> honestly believe that you can reinterpret any theoretical math to be
>> explained any way you want, and that should be considered legitimate.
>>
>> I don't know whether to laugh or just shake my head.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Thread

Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-01-31 08:26 -0800
  Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) olli.dp3@gmail.com - 2016-01-31 09:50 -0800
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-01 14:56 -0800
  Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 19:28 -0600
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-01 13:36 -0800
      Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 17:23 -0600
        Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-03 05:54 -0800
          Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 10:36 -0600
  Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 18:01 -0600
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-03 05:34 -0800
      Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 07:45 -0600
      Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) shan <shan@enterapps.org> - 2016-02-03 17:17 +0000
  Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-01 18:18 -0600
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-03 05:41 -0800
      Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 07:48 -0600
        Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-03 07:29 -0800
          Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 13:58 -0600
            Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-05 07:16 -0800
              Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 09:34 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-05 13:35 -0800
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 16:14 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-06 05:13 -0800
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) shan <shan@enterapps.org> - 2016-02-06 13:42 +0000
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-06 08:08 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-06 10:39 -0800
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-06 12:43 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 09:18 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 09:05 -0600
              Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 09:36 -0600
                Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-05 13:37 -0800
  Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) "nuny@bid.nes" <Alien8752@gmail.com> - 2016-02-03 19:27 -0800
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-04 00:19 -0500
    Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-05 07:34 -0800
  Re: Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-08 08:26 -0600

csiph-web