Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #408993
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: MMX violates the second postulate |
| Date | 2017-02-13 07:49 +0100 |
| Organization | Good company |
| Message-ID | <o7rkqf$1jl$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <o7huup$1942$3@gioia.aioe.org> <99130943.nniJfEyVGO@PointedEars.de> <5f06ba3d-0517-45a5-ab82-9d326197429a@googlegroups.com> <o7peeq$f3l$1@dont-email.me> <35300905-5d7f-451a-abe7-4705115fa2de@googlegroups.com> |
Dne 13/02/2017 v 01:30 Peter Riedt napsal(a): > > The thinking that c can be added to v is the basis of MMX. It is refuted by Einstein. It is not refuted by Einstein, but by MMX itself and plenty of other experiments. > I accept Michelson and do not subscribe to Einstein's hypothesis. You are free to believe anything. BTW, it is not a hypothesis for long time. > SR ignores Einstein that the speed of light is constant and has a limit of 300000000m/sec. It does not, you just ignore physics. Your confusion seems permanent. > This inconsistency makes MMX an invalid experiment within SR. To me it is valid and proves anisotropy. There is no inconsistency, but inconsistency of your ideas wrt known experimental evidence. Expectation the ignorance in math and physics leads to superior conclusions is foolish. Not being aware of it is not foolish, it is a diagnose. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) A wise man guards words he says, as they say about him more, than he says about the subject.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 23:57 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:06 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 00:11 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:14 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 01:13 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:53 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:39 -0600
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-02-11 23:37 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 01:53 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 11:22 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-12 11:48 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 16:30 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 07:49 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-12 23:25 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Emmaline Coots <ealoa@loealoioa.los> - 2017-02-13 12:58 +0000
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 08:52 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-13 00:18 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-13 04:03 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-12 08:45 -0600
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 16:14 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-13 08:19 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:09 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:19 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:31 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:27 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:36 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:49 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-09 01:16 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 10:58 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 02:13 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 21:38 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:13 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:30 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 19:32 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 00:41 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 20:00 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 01:13 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 21:39 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 03:09 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 22:25 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 03:57 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-09 23:53 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 05:38 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2017-02-10 10:52 +1100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 23:29 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-02-09 17:17 -0500
Re: MMX violates the second postulate The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-02-11 10:20 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 09:09 +0100
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 08:37 -0600
Re: MMX violates the second postulate mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-02-09 08:16 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2017-02-09 07:07 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2017-02-11 15:11 -0800
Re: MMX violates the second postulate Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2017-02-12 01:46 -0800
csiph-web