Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 11. The Twins Paradox absurdity. Next Document: 13. The "strange effects of nothing" absurdities. See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge If you have understood the ratio versus interval scale discussion, you know a lot of it already. (a) anytime SR uses a difference of transformed values it creates ratio scale data out of the degraded interal scale data. Most of SR does just that in practice. We have shown that such ratio scale data is 'just' rescaled galilean data. (b) as often as not it is E=mc^2 that is what is meant about SR working. Even if it is true that it is basic SR - and there are some who say that identity was known before Einstein - it has nothing directly to do with the derivation and transform absurdities. (c) sometimes it is meant that instead of galilean force, F, being F=ma, it is the relativistic force equation that is supported daily at every second of the day at accelerators like CERN. However, F=ma came from long before accelerators and Maxwell, and non-relativistic force models exist that at least come much closer than F=ma. (d) to show that Einstein's work is absurd in no way says that his Second Principle is wrong, only that his implementation is absurd. A correct implementation may be much closer to T'=T/g than to T'=T, etc. This would still require differences of the interval data to be used, unless there is some true, non-distorting ratio scale transform available. User Contributions:Top Document: Einstein (1905) Absurdities Previous Document: 11. The Twins Paradox absurdity. Next Document: 13. The "strange effects of nothing" absurdities. Single Page [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: Thnktank@concentric.net (Eleaticus)
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
|
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: