Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #567257
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion |
| Date | 2016-04-01 18:31 +0000 |
| Organization | The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 |
| Message-ID | <ndmeq3$pfl$1@pcls7.std.com> (permalink) |
| References | <ef6af78b-337b-447d-9fc8-35c712881d0b@googlegroups.com> <zbGdnRVLqKYax2XLnZ2dnUU7-aGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <5778fdf7-4797-47f0-a538-8506f4d35651@googlegroups.com> <ndkc8i$s0q$2@pcls7.std.com> <3ccde0d0-8b1c-4715-9cc6-09e5c809a724@googlegroups.com> |
kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 7:36:13 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote: >> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >> >> >No idiot...... absolute motion does not require an absolute reference >> >frame. An inertial frame in SR is a defined as an absolute reference >> >frame. >> >> How can you argue against SR if you don't even understand SR? SR doesn't >> have an absolute reference frame. The "R" stands for "Relativity", that's >> the whole point, no absolute anything needed. An inertial reference frame >> is defined as one with zero acceleration, and Newton's First Law is valid >> (all physical laws valid for SR) >Hey idiot moron-y.....in that case there is no inertial frame exists on >earth. Also every location in the ether fits your definition. That's why >SR and LET derived the same math. Of course there are inertial frames here. I can make them up as often as I want. There's one now! Whoops, there it goes, right through the floor! If you don't "get" this, then you don't understand what an inertial frame is, simple as that. An inertial frame is simply one where Newton's First Law holds, there is zero acceleration. Now trying to get ordinary objects stationary in an inertial frame can be difficult, esp. on Earth. For astronaut training, they created the "Vomit Comet" which is inertial for a limited time. >> > Each SR observer considers himself to be an absolute reference >> >frame.....that is identical to the LET assumption of the ether frame as >> >an absolute reference frame. That's why SR and LET have identical math. So since you don't understand what an inertial frame (or SR) is, why do you write this crap?
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-27 06:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-03-27 13:51 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 23:07 +0200
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 17:13 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-31 14:51 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-04-04 12:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 14:33 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2016-04-04 13:40 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:45 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:52 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:43 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:47 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:53 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 20:16 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:10 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:32 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-03-27 17:11 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-03-31 15:00 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-03-31 23:35 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 06:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 08:48 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 14:44 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:03 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:08 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:14 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-02 06:23 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:34 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:39 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 07:50 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-02 18:56 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:56 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:22 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:30 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 09:07 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:16 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 11:12 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:38 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:45 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 14:35 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 13:35 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:55 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 18:17 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 18:31 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-01 14:46 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-01 23:30 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-02 06:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 08:38 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 07:56 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:44 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:26 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 07:13 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:02 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 13:55 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-04-06 15:19 -0600
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 17:39 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:45 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-04-02 07:47 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-02 18:52 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-04 05:53 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 08:28 -0500
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-05 14:22 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-04-06 14:06 -0700
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-09 13:48 +0000
Re: Past and proposed experiments deteting absolute motion Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 09:05 -0500
csiph-web