home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.philosophy      Didn't Freud have sex with his mother?      170,335 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 168,562 of 170,335   
   Pentcho Valev to All   
   Why Antirelativists Worship Einstein's 1   
   08 Aug 23 01:58:17   
   
   From: pvalev@yahoo.com   
      
   Antirelativists repudiate any aspect of Einstein's theory except for his 1905   
   false constant-speed-of-light postulate. Actually, they worship this   
   postulate. Why? Because they are all etherists and Einstein "borrowed" the   
   postulate from the ether theory:   
      
   Albert Einstein: "I introduced the principle of the constancy of the velocity   
   of light, which I borrowed from H. A. Lorentz's theory of the stationary   
   luminiferous ether." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory   
      
   Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92: "Moreover, if light consists   
   of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen   
   weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from   
   a speeding train can    
   do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the   
   particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we   
   take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey   
   Newton's laws, they will    
   conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null   
   result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting   
   lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen,   
   Einstein resisted the temptation    
   to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple,   
   familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something   
   that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether.   
   If it was so obvious, though,   
    why did he need to state it as a principle? Because, having taken from the   
   idea of light waves in the ether the one aspect that he needed, he declared   
   early in his paper, to quote his own words, that "the introduction of a   
   'luminiferous ether' will    
   prove to be superfluous." https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-   
   oots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768   
      
   Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca