As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?" - https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.htmlthem whether the Ship doth move or stand still. In leaping you shall reach as far upon the floor, as before; nor for that the Ship moveth shall you make a greater leap towards the poop than towards the prow;" [Galilei, Galileo. Delphi Collected Works of
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
"The speed of light is said to be isotropic if it has the same value when measured in any/every direction."- Roberts
According to Galileo light speed is isotropic in any frame of reference moving with a uniform linear motion.
[Galileo= "make the Ship to move with what velocity you please; for (so long as the motion is uniforme, and not fluctuating this way and that way) you shall not discern any the least alteration in all the forenamed effects; nor can you gather by any of
Therefore, all experiments proving isotropy of light speed prove light shares the velocity of the source per Galileo.
Therefore, they disprove the second postulate, which asserts the contrary. It essentially asserts the "independence" of the speed of light from it's source. If light speed is independent of the source it would not be isotropic.
Shared velocity: additive velocity formula: sqrt c^2 + v^2 (Galilean). (1.) Independent velocity: additive velocity formula: sqrt c^2 - v^2 (Relativity). (2.)
Employing the Galilean formula to a transverse light beam in an inertial frame of reference results in the isotropic speed of light.
Employing the Relativity formula does not.
The Galilean explanation is far more parsimonious and SR is highly ad hoc.
Contrary to Roberts, modern physics is not based on relativity. It is based on Galileo and Newton.
Roberts has failed to practice "elementary error analysis" he demands of others.
Relativity's "domain of applicability" is in fiction.
"isotropyMathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of the source:
n. isotropism; uniformity of properties and characteristics along all axes (Physics)"
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of Special
Relativity?" - https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of the
source
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently
Relativity?" - https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether. I certainly agree with that.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?" - https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.htmlApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID IT.
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it
disproves it.
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE.
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Maybe you could read what I wrote? You do not know how to think logically as you defend logical fallacies such as ad populum and ad verrecundium instead of reasoning. Relativity is thoroughly ignorant nonsense. The only reason otherwise intelligent
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent withNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it
disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Why so heavy handed? You might listen: "This is what one (starting with Einstein) calls the
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent withNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it
disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:It is obvious that sqrt C^2 + V^2= 300000.0015 and that sqrt of c^2- V^2= 2.9999999.9985. How do you then get the isotropy of the longitudinal and transverse beams in an interferometer? You don't.
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent withNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it
disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent withNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it
disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them to me.
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html >>> He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, itNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Yes, I have good aim. The whole point is that relativity errors are elementary, and you can't address them. -LCC, skeptic of UFOs, Bigfoot & relativity.
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them to me.
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID >> IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.Not true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Your guns shoot blanks.
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them to me.
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID >> IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.Not true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Paul, it's like this. Galileo didn't say you couldn't tell the boat was moving. Einstein did.
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them to me.
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID >> IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.Not true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:"These tensor equations must then be covariant under allowed transformations, which is the correct discussion, and leads to all, and only those transformations that simply leave the speed invariant." -"The Theory Of Relativity - Galileo’s Child" -
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them to me.
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID >> IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment is certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.Not true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 4:14:29 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of SpecialApparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I
Relativity?" -
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID >> IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two >> quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of >>> the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment isNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.
Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
and ghosts, fairy tales, time travel...
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 4:32:50 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Poo Tom can't understand that isotropy of light speed falsifies the second postulate. That is very sad.
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 4:14:29 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:Nope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of Special >>> Relativity?" -Apparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I >> assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of >>> the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment isNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.
Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
and ghosts, fairy tales, time travel...Crossen, you remain clueless about all things regarding physics, and anyone with a high-school physics education can easily see this... and this is not likely to change anytime soon.
Your knowledge of physics is essentially a small pimple on the ass of Tom's knowledge of physics. As always, you don't know what you don't know!
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 5:14:21 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 4:32:50 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 4:14:29 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 2:05:22 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 3:33:24 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 9/3/23 12:40 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
On Saturday, September 2, 2023 at 6:24:08 PM UTC-7, Tom RobertsNope. READ WHAT I WROTE. Don't add your own fantasies and attribute them
wrote:
On 9/2/23 6:18 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:Perhaps you only meant the experiments as disproofs of the ether.
As given by him in: "What is the experimental basis of Special >>> Relativity?" -Apparently you are unable to read. NOWHERE on that webpage do I >> assert anything like that -- YOU JUST MADE IT UP AND PRETEND I SAID
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
He asserts isotropy of light speed as proof of SR.
IT.
[... "argument" full of puns that destroy any credibility]
For instance, "Shares the velocity of the source" is used with two
quite different meanings, ignoring the difference.
You REALLY need to learn how to read.
[...] Mathematical proof that light speed shares the velocity of
the source
This is not mathematical, is not a proof, and shows nothing.
You REALLY need to learn how to think.
Tom Roberts
to me.
You also said of several isotropy experiments: "So this experiment isNot true. Isotropy is indeed consistent with the predictions of SR.
certainly consistent with SR." "Their null result is consistent with
SR." Isotropy is not consistent with the second postulate, it disproves it.
I repeat: You REALLY need to learn how to read. You REALLY need to learn
how to think.
Tom Roberts
It is a simple math question. Please, do tell.
Do you always show up at a gun fight with a tiny little letter-opener?
and ghosts, fairy tales, time travel...Crossen, you remain clueless about all things regarding physics, and anyone with a high-school physics education can easily see this... and this is not likely to change anytime soon.
Your knowledge of physics is essentially a small pimple on the ass of Tom's knowledge of physics. As always, you don't know what you don't know!
Poo Tom can't understand that isotropy of light speed falsifies the second postulate. That is very sad.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 360 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 133:22:15 |
| Calls: | 7,686 |
| Files: | 12,828 |
| Messages: | 5,711,427 |