There is much in this link that I am totally ignorant of, which you might readily explain? But since this is my first look at it, I'll likely need more than a bit of time trying to figure it out.

http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/motionofphotons.html

 

The Absolute Motion Institute? Crackpot city. My suggestion is to learn actual relativity before trying to take on crap science.

There is much in this link that I am totally ignorant of, which you might readily explain? But since this is my first look at it, I'll likely need more than a bit of time trying to figure it out.

http://www.circlon-theory.com/HTML/motionofphotons.html

 

From that site:

Both of these postulates [the two postulates of special relativity] are vague, contradictory, and the elements within them are poorly defined. The results of many experiments performed since these postulates were first proposed in 1905 demand that their wording be altered and their elements to be more carefully defined in order to more accurately reflect reality.

Oh my. Where's the :rofl: emoticon when you need it? The postulates are very specific (= very testable) and are in concordance with one another. The results of experiments since 1905 are consistent with the results predicted by relativity. How much more wrong could that site be?

 

You have found one of a boatload of crackpot sites. I strongly suggest that you stop wasting your time and learn some real science instead.

From that site:

Both of these postulates [the two postulates of special relativity] are vague, contradictory, and the elements within them are poorly defined. The results of many experiments performed since these postulates were first proposed in 1905 demand that their wording be altered and their elements to be more carefully defined in order to more accurately reflect reality.

Oh my. Where's the :rofl: emoticon when you need it? The postulates are very specific (= very testable) and are in concordance with one another. The results of experiments since 1905 are consistent with the results predicted by relativity. How much more wrong could that site be?

 

You have found one of a boatload of crackpot sites. I strongly suggest that you stop wasting your time and learn some real science instead.

You're likely right. My total physics prowess came to an end when Einstein was demonstrating the up and down movement of an elevator and its effect on matter. Never really tried to associate it with time dilation.

Your conclusion does not follow from the premises. I cut your post off with the words "and at the same time" because that is the source of your error in understanding. One of the key consequences of relativity is that even simultaneity is relativity. There is no universal "at the same time".

 

You are wasting your time trying to disprove relativity mathematically. You aren't going to be able to that. The mathematics of special relativity is very sound. What you should be doing is trying to understand that mathematics.

 

Just because the mathematics of special relativity is very sound does not mean that it is right. After all, the mathematics of Newtonian mechanics is also very sound. Just because a theory is internally consistent does not mean it is correct. Scientific theories have an extra constraint: They have to describe reality. Experiment upon experiment have shown that it is relativity theory, not Newtonian mechanics, that describes what transpires at very high speeds.

 

 

Thank you DH, many thanks to All for interesting discussion and the search for truth in this intricate and perhaps still open topic.

 

"Man involved in science will never understand why he should believe in certain opinions simply because they are in a book. [...] Also he never deems its own results for the ultimate truth". A. Einstein

 

Reality does not always agree even with the most sound mathematics. If you put your one leg in boiling water (100 °C) and the other in a very cold ice (eg-50 ° C), then you should feel great, because the sound math shows that you are in the average temperature of 25 °C.

 

 

Edited January 31, 201213 yr by Bart

if you have a theory of an aether,then all particles would travel through or across it as a wave function.The particles that constitute mirrors in the michelson-morley and the particles that constitute the earth,would all be travelling through or across the aether,by the same principle that light would travel across the aether.In other words the light the experiment and the earth would all be travelling relative to each other across the aether.

Edited January 31, 201213 yr by derek w