Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #409001

Re: MMX violates the second postulate

From	Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: MMX violates the second postulate
Date	2017-02-13 08:52 +0100
Organization	Good company
Message-ID	<o7roh0$b24$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>

Show all headers | View raw

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 not, it is just the idea behind the the idea
of hypothesed aether wind inpact on the light speed.
The MMX was to confirm it, but refuted the wind idea instead.

> It is refuted by Einstein.

Scientific ideas are refuted by experiments.
As the plain algebraic addition of velocities.

> I accept Michelson and do not subscribe to Einstein's hypothesis.
> SR ignores Einstein that the speed of light is constant
> and has a limit of 300000000m/sec.
> This inconsistency makes MMX an invalid experiment within SR.

Have you ever read the nonsense you wrote ?

> To me it is valid and proves anisotropy.

The fact the experiment confirming this anisotropy is missing
does not bother you.

-- 
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )

A wise man guards words he says,
as they say about him more,
than he says about the subject.

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