Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Summit Clock Experiment 2.0: Time is Absolute

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
    Bryant is a senior VP for Wells Fargo with a background in software development and business, and he thinks he has debunked Relativity with a self-published book.
    Yep.

    Did you have something rational to contribute?

    Don't you think there is a reason he couldn't find a publisher, or any third-rate science journal, to accept his musings? In the book extracts I've seen, he discusses the Twin Paradox as if it is a Special Relativity issue without a solution, entirely unaware that the Twin Paradox is solved using General Relativity. Are we supposed to take this sort of uneducated crank serioiusly?
    You can respond however you like, once you've read the book. Or you can just ignore him and assume all is well with what you believe. Just don't pretend you've presented a serious case against his.

    Darwinists.

    Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
      Yep.

      Did you have something rational to contribute?



      You can respond however you like, once you've read the book. Or you can just ignore him and assume all is well with what you believe. Just don't pretend you've presented a serious case against his.

      Darwinists.

      Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
      Why don't you tell is what the most convincing part of the book is and we'll go from there, since you raised it. From the author's web site and the fawning book reviews from his crank web site friends I can't see anything of value. Enlighten me.
      Last edited by gcthomas; December 4th, 2017, 12:56 PM.


      Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

      Comment


      • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
        Why don't you tell is what the mosr convincing party of the book is and well go from there, since you raised it. From the author's web site and the floating book reviews from his crank web site friends I can't see anything of value. Enlighten me.
        Why doesn't User Name explain himself instead of posting links?

        Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
        Where is the evidence for a global flood?
        E≈mc2
        "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

        "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
        -Bob B.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
          Why doesn't User Name explain himself instead of posting links?

          Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
          You haven't posted a link to the text of the book, so you can't complain. If you had I'd have something to read.
          Last edited by gcthomas; December 4th, 2017, 01:34 PM.


          Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

          Comment


          • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
            You haven't posted a link to the text of the book, so you can't complain. If you had I'd have something to read.
            Oh, I'm the one complaining now?

            You're totally disinterested, aren't you?

            Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
            Where is the evidence for a global flood?
            E≈mc2
            "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

            "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
            -Bob B.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
              How do you establish relativity? Have you even read Einstein's paper that claims to do so?


              Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
              E≈mc2
              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
              -Bob B.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                Yes, I have. In translation - I tried the German but my high-school German was not up to it. The special relativity paper is actually quite short and readable. And Einstein's paper didn't 'establish' relativity, but proposed it. Experiments established it, as is usual in Physics.


                Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

                Comment


                • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
                  Yes, I have. In translation - I tried the German but my high-school German was not up to it. The special relativity paper is actually quite short and readable. And Einstein's paper didn't 'establish' relativity, but proposed it. Experiments established it, as is usual in Physics.
                  Your scientism is showing.

                  Experiments don't establish theories, the best they can do is fail to falsify them.

                  Relativity is a mathematical model. If it has not been established mathematically, it does not exist.

                  Might pay to read the paper again to refresh your memory while you reconsider your approach to science.

                  Here's an English version: http://einsteinpapers.press.princeto...vol2-trans/154


                  Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                  Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                  E≈mc2
                  "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                  "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                  -Bob B.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
                    Don't you think there is a reason he couldn't find a publisher, or any third-rate science journal, to accept his musings? In the book extracts I've seen, he discusses the Twin Paradox as if it is a Special Relativity issue without a solution, entirely unaware that the Twin Paradox is solved using General Relativity. Are we supposed to take this sort of uneducated crank seriously?
                    Yes, we are supposed to take uneducated cranks seriously. YECs love to play make-believe.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by User Name View Post
                      We are supposed to take uneducated cranks seriously.
                      Nope.

                      Try comprehension.

                      You are not required to pay any heed to anyone.

                      In fact, it would be preferable if you would completely ignore me.

                      However, to refute an idea, you have to engage rationally.

                      Dismissing an idea because of who wrote it is irrational nonsense.

                      Stupid, stupid Darwinists. They've been shown this numerous times, but without fail, they run to the genetic fallacy.

                      I think they are fooled by the name.

                      Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                      Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                      E≈mc2
                      "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                      "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                      -Bob B.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
                        Bryant is a senior VP for Wells Fargo with a background in software development and business, and he thinks he has debunked Relativity with a self-published book.
                        Here's a video:

                        .

                        Comment


                        • Here's a Web site: https://www.newscientist.com/round-u...ging-einstein/

                          Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                          Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                          E≈mc2
                          "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                          "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                          -Bob B.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                            Here's a Web site: https://www.newscientist.com/round-u...ging-einstein/

                            Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                            So you've found a site that repeats the widely accepted idea that GR will be replaced by a quantum theory of gravity that must reproduce the same predictions as relativity already does, given its experimental verification.


                            Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Stripe View Post
                              Your scientism is showing.

                              Experiments don't establish theories, the best they can do is fail to falsify them.

                              Relativity is a mathematical model. If it has not been established mathematically, it does not exist.

                              Might pay to read the paper again to refresh your memory while you reconsider your approach to science.

                              Here's an English version: http://einsteinpapers.press.princeto...vol2-trans/154


                              Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                              You are really quite wrong. What you could have correctly said was that experiments don't PROVE a theory true. It is certainly also true that successful experiments can change an hypothesis into an accepted, established, useful theory.

                              Did you skip high school science lessons?


                              Self appointed representative of the reality based community. [Send complaints to /dev/null.]

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by gcthomas View Post
                                You are really quite wrong. What you could have correctly said was that experiments don't PROVE a theory true. It is certainly also true that successful experiments can change an hypothesis into an accepted, established, useful theory.Did you skip high school science lessons?
                                Oh, right. High-school science.

                                The issue you are avoiding is that relativity is a mathematical model. If it has not been established mathematically, it does not exist.

                                Sent from my SM-A520F using TOL mobile app
                                Where is the evidence for a global flood?
                                E≈mc2
                                "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

                                "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
                                -Bob B.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X