Riedt vs Einstein
in [Relativity]
|
From: eric gisse on 9 Nov 2009 14:04 PD wrote: [...] > > Peter, you have tried to devise a formula that provides an anisotropy > of the speed of light and accounts for a SINGLE experimental result > (the MMX). However, the anisotropy of the speed of light is ruled out > to great precision by a number of OTHER experiments already, and you > appear to be ignorant of any of those experiments. It took him 50 years to figure out one experiment. Two is unreasonable. [...]
From: doug on 9 Nov 2009 16:44 eric gisse wrote: > PD wrote: > [...] > > >>Peter, you have tried to devise a formula that provides an anisotropy >>of the speed of light and accounts for a SINGLE experimental result >>(the MMX). However, the anisotropy of the speed of light is ruled out >>to great precision by a number of OTHER experiments already, and you >>appear to be ignorant of any of those experiments. > > > It took him 50 years to figure out one experiment. Two is unreasonable. From his posts, it appears he is still working on the first one. > > [...]
From: Inertial on 9 Nov 2009 17:51 "Peter Riedt" <riedt1(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:b2b12993-eaa6-4456-bcd1-bfc38aff0c03(a)u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com... > On Nov 8, 11:27 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_p> wrote: >> "Peter Riedt" <rie...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> >> news:d601676e-7098-47c8-aa4f-b2c0fdb6a613(a)r24g2000prf.googlegroups.com... >> Riedt vs Einstein >> >> Einstein's first postulate of Special Relativity (Principle of >> Relativity): The laws of Physics are the same in all inertial systems. >> No preferred inertial system exists. >> ============================================ >> No it isn't that at all. >> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/1st/Postulates.htm >> >> A team of scientists working under the direction of researchers from the >> University of Sussex have recently discovered that Einstein did not say >> "inertial". >> Here is the result of their experiment: >> http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/inertial.JPG > > Androcles, Einstein was a great mind. According to his friend and > collaborator Max Born (Einstein�s Theory of Relativity, Methuen 1924) > the POR of AE was: > �There are an infinite number of systems of reference (inertial > systems) moving uniformly and rectilinearly with respect to each > other, in which all physical laws assume the SIMPLEST form (originally > derived for absolute space or the stationary ether).� The brackets > inside the quotes are Born�s. That is wrong and the ( ) about aether is nonsense. > The SIMPLEST form is my anisotropic light formula c' = c*1/sqrt(1-vv/ > cc), not the complex Lorentz transformations of Lorentz, another great > mind. No .. its not the simplest. And it makes no sense. > Peter Riedt
From: Peter Riedt on 9 Nov 2009 21:17 On Nov 10, 3:04 am, eric gisse <jowr.pi.nos...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > PD wrote: > > [...] > > > > > Peter, you have tried to devise a formula that provides an anisotropy > > of the speed of light and accounts for a SINGLE experimental result > > (the MMX). However, the anisotropy of the speed of light is ruled out > > to great precision by a number of OTHER experiments already, and you > > appear to be ignorant of any of those experiments. > > It took him 50 years to figure out one experiment. Two is unreasonable. > > [...] Eric, wrong. It took me 50 years to find the SOLUTION to MMX and the anisotropy of light. No one has achieved the first in 122 years and only partially and inconclusively the second. Peter Riedt
From: Peter Riedt on 9 Nov 2009 21:23
On Nov 10, 2:10 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 8, 7:20 am, Peter Riedt <rie...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > Riedt vs Einstein > > > Einstein's first postulate of Special Relativity (Principle of > > Relativity): The laws of Physics are the same in all inertial systems. > > No preferred inertial system exists. > > > Riedts POR: The laws of physics are the same in all systems but > > measurement data is not available instantaneously and therefore varies > > for observers at different locations and moving with a different > > velocity. > > A basic misunderstanding here, Peter. The laws of physics being the > same in all inertial frames does NOT mean that measured quantities are > the same in all inertial frames. Velocity is a good example of a > quantity that is known to be different in different inertial frames, > and this doesn't have anything to do with the first postulate of > special relativity. > > > > > A proof of both principles is not required as they are axioms. > > > Einstein's second postulate of Special Relativity (Principle of the > > Constancy of the Speed of Light): The speed of light in free space has > > the same value c in all inertial systems. > > > The proof consisted of a metaphor of trains, railway stations and some > > assertions. > > No sir. The gedanken of trains and railway stations is not intended as > any kind of proof at all. It is an explanation of what *follows* from > that postulate. The postulate is not proven, as it is a postulate. > However, all experimental evidence to date says that yes, the speed of > light has the same value c in all inertial systems. In science, it's > the experimental evidence that serves as the indicator of truth. > > > > > Riedts Principle of Inconstancy of Light: The speed of light in free > > space is anisotropic depending on the speed of the source. > > This is inconsistent with a number of DIRECT tests of the anisotropy > of the speed of light. Do you know what those direct tests are? > > > PD, the speed of light is anisotropic in MMX. The difference between c and c' calculated with my anisotropic light formula c' = c*1/sqrt(1-vv/ cc) is only 1.5m/sec. It is sufficient to account for the null result but insufficient to be noticed outside MMX, allowing false claims that the speed of light is 100% isotropic. Peter Riedt |