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