Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #357525

Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005

Show all headers | View raw

On Friday, July 17, 2015 at 8:20:55 AM UTC+8, John Heath wrote:
> On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 12:13:36 PM UTC-4, chanr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 7:50:50 PM UTC+8, John Heath wrote:
> > > Hi Chan
> > > 
> > > This foreign devil communicates with main land China on a regular basis to resolve technical issues. Judging on the people I am talking to 13.19 percent in agreement with relativity sounds a little short. I would guess it to be in the neighborhood of 93.19 percent. Then again if the pole is done way out in the back country there could be a 90 percent agreement that the earth is flat as anyone willing to open their eyes can plainly see. It really  depends on where the pole is taken. The same pole done in western countries would yield similar results to the ones you quoted.   
> > > 
> > > On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 4:11:46 AM UTC-4, chanr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 3:57:20 PM UTC+8, Peter Riedt wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 3:17:32 PM UTC+8, chanr...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > This was a  poll related to The International Year of Physics 2005.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > About the overall appraisal to the theory of relativity, the website of Beijing Relativity Theory Research Federation once has carried on the voting to the following five
> > > > > > viewpoints, from 12 o'clock, September 23, 2003 to 10 o'clock, May 2, 2005, altogether 1,425 people
> > > > > > participated in the voting, its result as follows: 
> > > > > > (1) The relativity is absolutely wrong, 736 people, account for 51.65%; 
> > > > > > (2) It is entirely accurate, 188 people, account for 13.19%; 
> > > > > > (3) It needs to revise, 406 people, account for 28.49%; 
> > > > > > (4) It has not mattered, 40 people, account for 2.81%; 
> > > > > > (5) It is not unnecessary, 55 people, account for 3.86%. 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Chan Rasjid.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Chan, thanks for the post. While many scientists understand that the theory is wrong they cannot admit this. To do so as Pentcho pointed out would have dire consequences.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Peter Riedt
> > > > 
> > > > I am Chinese. I know the Chinese mentality. If there is anything from the West that is considered high and sacred but wrong, the Chinese would not miss the opportunity to criticize it. But of course, normal people are still fair and rational. I have never heard of any Chinese talking bad about Isaac Newton. I think the Chinese too has a great respect for the name of Isaac Newton despite the English being called "foreign devils" when they first appeared in China.     
> > > > 
> > > > Best Regards,
> > > > Chan Rasjid.
> > 
> > Hello John,
> > 
> > I am not surprised at all of the result of the poll - 50% clear against, 13% clear for. I remember there was another poll in China with basically the same result - nothing surprising at all; it was China not the West! 
> > 
> > People here like to think there is such a thing as the scientific method - that Einstein's relativity is all, and only, about science. But the big question is whether the people who teaches relativity are using or not using the criterion of the scientific method. You can teach a scientific topic by breaking all known and accepted criteria of the scientific method.
> > 
> > The world has the rational as well as the non-rational. Science is rational based on logic. Religion is a belief system and not based on logical rationalization. Islam has the five pillars which are the analogy of axioms in mathematics. Just as you do not question the axioms, a Muslim does not question the existence of God - it is an article of faith. And an article of faith by definition goes beyond the domain of logic - and rightly so.  
> > 
> > A science can easily be turned over into the realm of the non-rational and the method of belief systems is used to support it. It has a clear precedent in history and the same is happening to Einstein's relativity - it is no more examined based on scientific criterion because the human emotions and prejudices have insidiously overtaken the examination of the science - it is now treated (in the West) in the manner of a religion.      
> > 
> > In the old days, the Church promoted the belief that the earth was the center of the universe. Most people could not 
> > determine by themselves which should be the correct answer and many would naturally accept the words of their religious mentors. And the priesthood have sacred proofs - verses from the Bible.
> > 
> > In the present case of Einstein's relativity - the bible is the "...many many indisputable experimental evidence in total agreement with...relativity theory... ". But how many of you know how to measure the momentum or rest mass of a proton - they told us so, have been done for us, etc. We trust the CERN physicists just as the common people of old trusts their priests. Most of us have no access to the LHC, and, if we had, we may blow-up the world which the Lord God created by accidentally creating a black hole!
> > 
> > But the like of Copernicus, Galileo have what we call insight - and they see farther ahead than the crowd. So don't believe that the human being can so easily act impartial.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Chan Rasjid.
> 
> Hi Chan
> 
> The second question in the pole:
> 
> (2) It is entirely accurate, 188 people, account for 13.19%; 
> 
> 
> Somehow this does not sound like a question that would come from Beijing Relativity Theory Research Federation. Perhaps the true meaning was lost in the translation. Of the three options I have provided which one comes closest to the true meaning in your mind.   
> 
> accurate information : 准确信息 
> 
> accurate method : 准确方法 
> 
> accurate representation : 准确的表示

I apologize that I can't read Chinese. I have read some articles of relativity by the mainland Chinese in English and I notice that many of them do not write good and clear English.

The paper from which the poll was taken is :
Research and Challenge: Relativity in China
Fu Yuhua
China Offshore Oil Research Center, P.O.Box 4728, Beijing 100027, C
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/1656

Quote:
(1) The relativity is absolutely wrong, 736 people, account for 51.65%;
(2) It is entirely accurate, 188 people, account for 13.19%; 
(3) It needs to revise, 406 people, account for 28.49%; 
...
From the above result we can see that, considering the theory of relativity is entirely accurate only
occupies few, but considering the theory of relativity is absolutely wrong has unexpectedly surpassed
the half. Considering some people have not made the overall appraisal to the theory of relativity, moreover
the viewpoint of "needs to revise" also may further subdivide. Therefore in order to be advantageous for
the discussion, this paper mainly includes the following viewpoints of the overall appraisal and the
partial appraisals to the theory of relativity: 
(1) The theory of relativity is entirely accurate, may further develop and enhance in its frame; 
(2) The theory of relativity is absolutely wrong, needs to open the new road to displace it; 
(3) The theory of relativity’s achievements outweigh its errors, needs to correct its part of mistakes
and to amend the theory of relativity; 
(4) The theory of relativity’s errors outweigh its achievements (or the achievements correspond
with the errors), needs to open the new road to displace it based on absorbing its reasonable
parts; 
(5) It does not involve the overall appraisal to the theory of relativity, only discusses the concrete
questions related directly or indirectly to the theory of relativity.

In the non-mainstream factions, the people which hold the first viewpoint are extremely few; ...

End quote.

I did goggle about Beijing Relativity Theory Research Federation but found nothing much. I think it is a federation not just of physicists who accepted relativity, but also for physicists who challenge the validity of relativity. The author Fu Yuhua don't seem to write proper English. We can make a good guess of the meaning of "entirely accurate" as the opposite of "absolutely wrong, as a theory that is completely validated; no evidence have been found to contradict it.    

Best Regards,
Chan Rasjid.

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

Thread

Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 04:50 -0700
  Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 chanrasjid@gmail.com - 2015-07-16 09:13 -0700
    Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 chanrasjid@gmail.com - 2015-07-16 18:02 -0700
      Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 chanrasjid@gmail.com - 2015-07-18 13:42 -0700
        Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-07-18 23:05 +0200
        Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-18 14:51 -0700
        Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 chanrasjid@gmail.com - 2015-07-18 14:52 -0700
          Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-07-18 15:21 -0700
      Re: The Chinese poll on Einstein's relativity theories - 2005 YBM <ybmess@nooos.fr.invalid> - 2015-07-22 14:25 +0200

csiph-web