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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #423319

Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity

From Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups sci.physics.relativity
Subject Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity
Date 2017-06-23 07:32 -0500
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <oij1og$o2v$3@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (6 earlier) <3b6631da-8688-4d35-8912-af0acd58b74f@googlegroups.com> <d5dac450-a58f-4173-bbdb-1d619f988fac@googlegroups.com> <659b8da4-cdc1-4dc8-b28e-ddab690a6715@googlegroups.com> <5f7db5c9-9583-4ffa-b433-8c612c77c0b4@googlegroups.com> <54ed6dda-e125-4e5d-8613-937404f32e2a@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/23/17 4:30 AM, Nicolaas Vroom wrote:
> On Thursday, 22 June 2017 15:17:29 UTC+2, Gary Harnagel  wrote:
> 
>> Not really.  If you claim without evidence that the laws of physics are
>> different from what they are locally, you are violating the law of
>> parsimony (Occam's razor).  It amounts to sheer speculation.
> 
> Sorry, I'am not claiming anything.
> I'am only asking the question if the speed of light is constant.
> What you are saying (my interpretation): Yes locally.
> My reply would be: that is not a full answer.
> IMO a better answer would be: it depends.

Actually his answer is better than that, because it's less wishy-washy 
than "it depends". It is not true that the speed of light is constant in 
an absolute sense. But what IS true is that in any local environment 
where the curvature of spacetime is smaller than experimental resolution 
would be able to detect, the speed of light in vacuum will always be 
measured to be constant. That's as definitive as it gets.


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

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

Thread

Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-19 03:57 -0700
  Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Rhett Doucet <ttdh@etoe.ee> - 2017-06-19 13:30 +0000
  Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-19 06:35 -0700
  Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-19 07:47 -0700
    Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-19 09:19 -0700
  Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-19 22:51 -0500
    Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 02:36 -0500
      Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-20 04:06 -0700
        Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 06:51 -0500
          Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 08:26 -0500
            Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 09:09 -0500
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:12 -0500
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 16:56 +0000
          Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-20 07:07 -0700
            Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 10:38 -0500
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-20 09:53 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 19:50 -0500
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-20 19:45 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Lipek Mniak <iluka@sskwpiw.pp> - 2017-06-21 12:18 +0000
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:12 -0500
            Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Nicolaas Vroom <nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be> - 2017-06-21 13:22 -0700
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-21 18:08 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Nicolaas Vroom <nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be> - 2017-06-22 02:10 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-22 02:52 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Nicolaas Vroom <nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be> - 2017-06-22 03:47 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-22 04:16 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-22 06:17 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-22 06:40 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Nicolaas Vroom <nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be> - 2017-06-23 02:30 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-23 03:49 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-23 07:32 -0500
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2017-06-23 05:53 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-06-23 06:38 -0700
                Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Valok Planek <lkupuu@kwklewan.oo> - 2017-06-24 10:27 +0000
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-23 09:43 -0500
      Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 11:20 +0000
        Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 06:54 -0500
          Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 08:29 -0500
            Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 09:17 -0500
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 11:12 -0500
              Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-06-21 17:11 +0000
      Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-20 09:03 -0500
        Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Ned Latham <nedlatham@woden.valhalla.oz> - 2017-06-20 10:24 -0500
          Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Eshiki Orakut <usa@iwikuh.ki> - 2017-06-20 16:54 +0000
          Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-20 20:05 -0500
    Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-06-20 18:56 +0200
      Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-06-20 20:17 -0500
        Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Eshiki Orakut <usa@iwikuh.ki> - 2017-06-21 09:38 +0000
  Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2017-06-20 02:48 -0700
    Re: Valid and Invalid Arguments in Special Relativity Eshiki Orakut <usa@iwikuh.ki> - 2017-06-20 13:05 +0000

csiph-web