I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?


Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.


(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)







--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

If you have slow time the universe around you can age faster...

2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.

Light has its own motion.

3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.

The limb of the solar atmosphere material scatters light. Sobral did not measure that.
It measured what gravity would do in a preferred direction not scattering of light by matter.

4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.

Singularities require infinite gravity manifesting
where that math does not manifest.
Gravity strength cannot jump from large finite to the infinite.

5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.

Gravity does move. Look at the Earth's field orbiting the solar...

6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.

Light leaving the Sun decreases in energy or wavelength expands...

7. Of length contraction.

Atom's are round. They cannot contract or it would change Pi math.

8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.

Gravity is not a parabolic metric. It is a closed curve with a center
of order. Gravity is a round metric extending in space.

9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.

Kinetic energy is from atom's own speed.

10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

If you begin to move you see an opposite appearance around you.
How can your frame give kinetic energy to all others comparable?

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass. 4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)

(correction: I forgot to add the word NO.)

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)



--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 7:03:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)

(correction: I forgot to add the word NO.)

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 7:21:25 PM UTC-7, Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 7:03:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)

(correction: I forgot to add the word NO.)

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

How would you measure the difference between relative and absolute?
The atom can compete with light staying ahead of it at a motion BH.
If the atom can compete with light and it is absolute... does that
not prove it has an absolute relationship of its own motion?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future. Time dilation has conclusive experimental evidence'and is
suggestive of time travel into the future.

2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.

Light is always measured (locally) to travel at c, even when its source and detector are in relative motion.
This suggests that there is a speed limit for light.

Particles have been accelerated to 99.9999% of c but cannot be made to reach c, even though their energy
continues to increase. This suggests that there is a speed limit for objects with mass.

3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.

Experiments during the Cassini mission communicated with earth when the earth was behind the sun,
confirming Eddington's measurement during a solar eclipse. Both agreed with the GR prediction rather
than the Newtonian prediction.

4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.

Pictures of matter circling black holes, but singularities are hidden behind the event horizons. Frankly,
I doubt that zero-size objects can exist..

5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital
dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.

6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.

See 3. above.

7. Of length contraction.

Length contraction is suggested by the magnetic field produced by electrons moving down a wire.
LC is due to the relativity of simultaneity, causing different measures of what is simultaneous in
the stationary vs. the moving frames.

8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.

9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.

Actually, it's an energy-velocity relationship (see 2. above). Mass is considered to be invariant.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

"I try to be skeptical of everything (I don't believe there's any
other way to learn about how the world really works)."
-- Lawrence M. Krauss

However, you need to work on having an open mind, that is, HONESTLY
evaluating the evidence.

“Relativity and quantum mechanics were not invented because someone
thought it would be a good idea for the universe to obey these rules;
rather, these revolutionary ideas were forced upon us by nature.”
-- Lawrence M. Krauss

Scientist were dragged kicking and screaming into those disciplines.
They finally relented because they had to or deny voluminous experimental evidence and become unsane.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future.

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel into the future. Name one!



--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 06:02:03 UTC+2, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future. Time dilation has conclusive experimental evidence'and is

fabricated by fanatic idiots like you, and in the meantime
in the real world - forbiddwn by them "improper" clocks
keep measuring t'=t, just like all serious clocks always
did.

Light is always measured (locally) to travel at c,

But the absurdic system of measurements you've invented
to secure the "confirmations" of your mad mumble can only
work in a small scale.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 7:03:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)

(correction: I forgot to add the word NO.)

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

You're hiding behind a link of "summaries" by someone named Tom Roberts
in 2007???? dats suppose to mean something?

chicken.





--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 11:19:05 UTC+2, Lou wrote:

This speed limit is a myth.

Maybe it is or maybe not, anyway, while fundamental
for SR shit it's impossible to fit GR shit.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 05:02:03 UTC+1, Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future. Time dilation has conclusive experimental evidence'and is
suggestive of time travel into the future.

2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.

Light is always measured (locally) to travel at c, even when its source and detector are in relative motion.
This suggests that there is a speed limit for light.

Particles have been accelerated to 99.9999% of c but cannot be made to reach c, even though their energy
continues to increase. This suggests that there is a speed limit for objects with mass.

This speed limit is a myth. Calculations based on relativity come to the conclusion that
an infinite amount of energy is needed to reach c. So an artificial assumption of
speeds of <c of the accelerated particles possible under relativity is only ever made. No
actual seperate reading or measurement of c is ever made. And no attempts to use a
Newtonian formula to deduce speeds are ever made.

3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.

Experiments during the Cassini mission communicated with earth when the earth was behind the sun,
confirming Eddington's measurement during a solar eclipse. Both agreed with the GR prediction rather
than the Newtonian prediction.

Another false claim made by relativists. Contrary to numerous claims
that Cassini data rules out refraction as the source of observed time delays, Bertotti et al (1993 & 2003) actually never did ANY analysis to test and
rule out refraction.
In fact as the papers authors, Bertotti et al admit in section
3.1, 2003 the two seperate frequencies measured for time delay
by Cassini had to be combined together using algorithms
because each frequency on its own was too messy due to
intense coronal variation. In other words data from each
channel was not ever even available for testing of refraction.
(A prerequisite to test for delays due to refraction needs to
have a comparison made between these two seperate channels.)

4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.

Pictures of matter circling black holes, but singularities are hidden behind the event horizons. Frankly,
I doubt that zero-size objects can exist..

5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital
dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.

6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.

See 3. above.

The landmark Bertotti papers (2003,1993) even admit that testing to rule refraction in or
out was never actually made. Contrary to the myth perpetrated by relativists.

However, you need to work on having an open mind, that is, HONESTLY evaluating the evidence.

How can you evaluate the evidence?
You seem to be unable to accept any evidence. Your preference is myth
and assumptions

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 10:21:02 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:

Gary Harnagel wrote:

SR admits only to time travel into the future.

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel into the future. Name one!
--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

" It is solutions that correspond to the world, not the equations themselves. IOW: it does not matter if physical models are invariant under time reversal
if there is no possible way to implement it in the real world." -- T. J. Roberts

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 10:28:01 UTC+1, Maciej Wozniak wrote:

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 11:19:05 UTC+2, Lou wrote:

This speed limit is a myth.

Maybe it is or maybe not, anyway, while fundamental
for SR shit it's impossible to fit GR shit.

Yes. I agree.What the relativists do, in Filipas Fox for instance, is say that as relativistic effects slow down the speed of the particle it
therefore takes more input eV energy to accelerate a particle
to a certain speed than it does under a classical model
So if x electron volts are used to accelerate energy vs speed for particles
to .5 c under relativity. Then the same energy/speed for a classical model would have
the particles speed calculated to travel a slightly faster speed of let’s say 0.55 c.
So the relativist pulls a sneaky trick. They say the particles are at 0.5 c in the accelerator
and then they say look! We’ve calculated what offset classical theory predicts
if the particles are at 0.5 c And the classical prediction is wrong!
Of course it’s wrong. The relativists made sure classical theory calculations didn’t
use the correct classically calculated speed of 0.55c

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-10-06 04:21:16 +0000, The Starmaker said:

Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark
Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future.

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel
into the future. Name one!

"One known scientist" is not enough. You need someone who knows
something about the subject. It's easy to find "known scientists", even
quite distinguished ones, like James Tour, who promulgate rubbish that
they don't understand about biological evolution. I imagine one can
find similar people among physicists.


--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2023-10-06 16:45:50 +0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden said:

On 2023-10-06 04:21:16 +0000, The Starmaker said:

Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark
Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future.

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel
into the future. Name one!

"One known scientist" is not enough. You need someone who knows
something about the subject. It's easy to find "known scientists", even
quite distinguished ones, like James Tour, who promulgate rubbish that
they don't understand about biological evolution. I imagine one can
find similar people among physicists.

I suppose Herbert Dingle would qualify, as he was reasonably well
considered in what he knew best.


--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 6 October 2023 at 18:45:55 UTC+2, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2023-10-06 04:21:16 +0000, The Starmaker said:

Gary Harnagel wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 5:29:09 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark
Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.

SR admits only to time travel into the future.

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel into the future. Name one!

"One known scientist" is not enough. You need someone who knows
something about the subject. It's easy to find "known scientists", even quite distinguished ones, like James Tour, who promulgate rubbish that
they don't understand about biological evolution. I imagine one can
find similar people among physicists.

Of course, well, all of them. As well as yourself.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 10:52:54 AM UTC-6, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:

On 2023-10-06 16:45:50 +0000, Athel Cornish-Bowden said:

On 2023-10-06 04:21:16 +0000, The Starmaker said:

Name one known scientists that 'believes' SR admits only to time travel into the future. Name one!

"One known scientist" is not enough. You need someone who knows
something about the subject. It's easy to find "known scientists", even quite distinguished ones, like James Tour, who promulgate rubbish that they don't understand about biological evolution. I imagine one can
find similar people among physicists.

I suppose Herbert Dingle would qualify, as he was reasonably well
considered in what he knew best.
--
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots

I presume H.D. qualifies because he "promulgates rubbish" concerning relativity? Another would be Louis Essen, inventor of the atomic clock.

I have an old book by Dingle entitled "Relativity for All" written before he jumped off the wagon. It doesn't appear that he really understood it
even then.

Gary - physicist, not a biochemist, but judges by the message, not by the messenger

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 05 Oct 2023 23:04:30 -0700, The Starmaker
<starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 7:03:01 PM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:

The Starmaker wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: >> > > > > "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

What evidence would that be, exactly?

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Having an open mind is a fine idea... just not so open that your brains fall out!

Yes, there is evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are incorrect?

Be specific.

\Paul the Heckler, who only heckles those who absolutely do not know what they do not know.

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

Start with the first one if you dare:

1. Of time travel.

(but, everybody already knows you don't dare because you are chicken)

(correction: I forgot to add the word NO.)

No, there is NO evidence in support of all those points, so my question for you is... what evidence do *you* have that any of them are correct?

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

You're hiding behind a link of "summaries" by someone named Tom Roberts
in 2007???? dats suppose to mean something?

chicken.

There is no mention ....Of time travel on dat page.


https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html


stupid chicken.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 2:53:48 PM UTC-6, The Starmaker wrote:

On Thu, 05 Oct 2023 23:04:30 -0700, The Starmaker
<star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

Paul Alsing wrote:

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

You're hiding behind a link of "summaries" by someone named Tom Roberts
in 2007???? dats suppose to mean something?

chicken.

There is no mention ....Of time travel on dat page.

https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

Remember this, drumstick?

"SR admits only to time travel into the future. Time dilation has conclusive experimental evidence'and is suggestive of time travel into the future."

The only way to possibly get time travel into the past is to exceed the speed of light, e.g., if tachyons exist. I have shown that even if they did exist and
could exceed the speed of light, a message could not be sent into one's own past. DOI: 10.13189/ujpa.2023.170101. I suspect that similar limitations would apply to wormholes and warp metrics, see

Friedman J., Morris M. S., Novikov I.D., Echeverria F., Klinkhammer G., Thorne K. S., Yurtsever U., “Cauchy problem in spacetimes with closed timelike curves,”
Physical Review. D, 42, pp. 1915-1930, 1990. DOI:10.1103/physrevd.42.1915.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

This is not how science works.

--
Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 7 October 2023 at 05:20:24 UTC+2, JanPB wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass. 4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

This is not how science works.

You have no clue how science works, and no surprise:
it's complicated and you're an idiot.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 8:20:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass. 4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

This is not how science works.

--
Jan

You can doubt the truth but it won't change jan...
Even Einstein didn't need relativity.
He proposed an option motion theory
that does not have the relativity contradictions.

Mitchell Raemsch

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Le 08/10/2023 à 20:16, smitchthebiggot@gmail.com a écrit :

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 8:20:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass. >>> 4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

This is not how science works.

--
Jan

You can doubt the truth but it won't change jan...
Even Einstein didn't need relativity.
He proposed an option motion theory
that does not have the relativity contradictions.

Why do you lie Smitch?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:47:32 AM UTC-7, Python wrote:

Le 08/10/2023 à 20:16, smitcht...@gmail.com a écrit :

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 8:20:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best:
"evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass. >>> 4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity.

This is not how science works.

--
Jan

You can doubt the truth but it won't change jan...
Even Einstein didn't need relativity.
He proposed an option motion theory
that does not have the relativity contradictions.

Why do you lie Smitch?

You just don't like the truth. The liar lies and it is not me.
Einstein didn't need relativity with its contradictions...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, October 10, 2023 at 11:01:36 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:

On Sunday, October 8, 2023 at 11:47:32 AM UTC-7, Python wrote:

Le 08/10/2023 à 20:16, smitcht...@gmail.com a écrit :

On Friday, October 6, 2023 at 8:20:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote:

On Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 4:29:09 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:

I like criticizing reincarnation claims.
Even scientists studying such claims only claim they have, at best: >>> "evidence suggestive of reincarnation."

I recommend relativists adopt the same policy.

List of evidence suggestive of relativity:

1. Of time travel.
2. Of a speed limit for everything, electromagnetic or not, of C, including relative motion involving the observer.
3. Of gravity bending the path of photons even though they have no mass.
4. Of singularities, a mathematical fiction actually existing.
5. Of gravity, moving the speed of light without causing angular momentum to throw off all orbital dynamics completely instead of fine-tuning them.
6. Of Newtonian gravitational redshift instead of twice Newtonian as in bending of light.
7. Of length contraction.
8. Of the reification of space and curving of it.
9. Of a mass-velocity relationship.
10.

-Trying to keep an open mind to relativity.

Laurence Clark Crossen - Skeptic of ghosts, bigfoot, and relativity. >> This is not how science works.

--
Jan

You can doubt the truth but it won't change jan...
Even Einstein didn't need relativity.
He proposed an option motion theory
that does not have the relativity contradictions.

Why do you lie Smitch?

You just don't like the truth. The liar lies and it is not me.
Einstein didn't need relativity with its contradictions...

Retrograde motion is a relative appearance caused by absolute motion of the planets.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gU2F0dXJkYXksIE9jdG9iZXIgMTQsIDIwMjMgYXQgMTE6MjI6NTHigK9BTSBVVEMtNywgTGxv eWQgRG9nYWRhZXYgd3JvdGU6DQo+IG1pdGNoci4uLkBnbWFpbC5jb20gd3JvdGU6IA0KPiANCj4g Pj4gPiBXaHkgZG8geW91IGxpZSBTbWl0Y2g/IA0KPiA+PiBZb3UganVzdCBkb24ndCBsaWtlIHRo ZSB0cnV0aC4gVGhlIGxpYXIgbGllcyBhbmQgaXQgaXMgbm90IG1lLiBFaW5zdGVpbiANCj4gPj4g ZGlkbid0IG5lZWQgcmVsYXRpdml0eSB3aXRoIGl0cyBjb250cmFkaWN0aW9ucy4uLiANCj4gPiAN Cj4gPiBSZXRyb2dyYWRlIG1vdGlvbiBpcyBhIHJlbGF0aXZlIGFwcGVhcmFuY2UgY2F1c2VkIGJ5 IGFic29sdXRlIG1vdGlvbiBvZiANCj4gPiB0aGUgcGxhbmV0cy4NCj4gd2UgYWdyZWUuIEdhcyBw bGFuZXRzIGFyZSBpbXBvc3NpYmxlLiBKdXBpdGVyIGlzIG5vdCBhIGdhcyBwbGFuZXQuIEFtYXpp bmcgDQo+IHRoZXNlIPCdl67wnZiA8J2YgfCdl7/wnZe8bmF1dHMgY2FuIGJlIHNvIHN0dXBpZC4g 8J2XmvCdl67wnZiAIPCdl73wnZe58J2XrvCdl7vwnZey8J2YgfCdmIAgbXkgYXNzLiANCg0KWW91 IGFyZSB0aGUgYXNzLiBPdXRlciBwbGFuZXRzIGFyZSBnYXMuDQoNCj4gdGhleSBkaWRuJ3QgbGFu ZCBvbiBhbnkg8J2XrvCdmIDwnZiB8J2Xv/Cdl7wuIPCdl5TwnZiA8J2YgfCdl7/wnZe8bmF1dHMg bXkgYXNzLiBUaGVzZSBhbWVyaWNhbnMgZG9uJ3Qga25vdyANCj4gd2hhdCDwnZeu8J2YgPCdmIHw nZe/8J2XvCBzdGFuZHMgZm9yIGluIHBoeXNpY3MuIEhlcmUncyBhbm90aGVyIGltYmVjaWxlIA0K PiANCj4g8J2XlfCdl7bwnZex8J2XsvCdl7vigJnwnZiAX/Cdl6bwnZey8J2XsPCdl7/wnZey8J2Y gfCdl67wnZe/8J2Yhl/wnZe88J2Xs1/wnZem8J2YgfCdl67wnZiB8J2Xsl/wnZem8J2XrvCdmIbw nZiAX/Cdl5TwnZiB8J2YgfCdl67wnZew8J2XuF/wnZe88J2Xu1/wnZec8J2YgPCdl7/wnZeu8J2X svCdl7lf4oCc8J2XnPCdmIBf8J2YgfCdl7XwnZeyX/Cdl5jwnZe+8J2YgvCdl7bwnZiD8J2XrvCd l7nwnZey8J2Xu/CdmIFf8J2XvPCdl7Nf8J2Xp/Cdl7LwnZe7XzkvMTHwnZiA4oCdIA0KPiBodHRw czovL3RoZXBlb3BsZXN2b2ljZS50di9iaWRlbnMtc2VjcmV0YXJ5LW9mLXN0YXRlLXNheXMtYXR0 YWNrLW9uLSANCj4gaXNyYWVsLWlzLXRoZS1lcXVpdmFsZW50LW9mLXRlbi05LTExcy8NCg==

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)