I think there are aspects of QM that are rather well established, but much less so with SR.
It seems to me that Quantum Physics is open to many different interpretations and really isn't dogmatic about which is true.<<

Like Quantum physics - SR is open to different interpretations, but unlike Quantum physics rarely admits to the different interpretations.

For instance -- Lorentz transformations can be interpreted the Einsteinian or Lorentzian way.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Jonathan Berry" <jonathanberry3...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, 12 Nov, 23 At 00:50
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether

Discussing about physics needs years long reflection about what physical constants mean and how these interrelate and are measured. A constant is an obsession and assumption that it will continue under all conditions. In the case of Light speed it is an illogical assumption if we apply what might be true for the 2 way speed of light is also true for the one way speed of light.

Also I have been thinking about this for 25 years, is that enough?

Further we must understand that all current still hyped models have been developed with marginal experimental knowledge.
Very true!

If somebody believes that e.g. QM is a fundamental model that he is a member of sect not a physicist. I think there are aspects of QM that are rather well established, but much less so with SR. It seems to me that Quantum Physics is open to many different interpretations and really isn't dogmatic about which is true. There is even super-determinism which seems nuts to me that takes a lot of the weirdness from QM.

Also the many worlds interpretation removes a lot of weirdness.

Same for GR that already Einstein in 1952 declared being a castle in the air. He then argued that the world is made of infinite many systems with their own speed of light (c) and thus any relation between such systems constructed by SRT/GR are fiction not science.
He was a lot more humble than those who continued his theories.
I wasn't aware he said that and will seek an exact quote.

The problem is the photon of which we only can measure the local wave number = energy in relation to local "c". Theoretically we could find its velocity by taking into account the red/blue shift but which model should we use. SRT provably only works for local mass but what shall we do with a photon speed of c+v? Using red or blue shift for speed, or at least adjustments of speed is logical.

Though I guess it tells us nothing of the speed of the medium, that only cares about relative velocity between emitter and reciever.

Consequence: We have to overcome the today's silly - kindergarten physics models and we should start to understand the structure of all forms of matter. I could teach 2 term course about all failures and errors in current physics - models and also what for the models still are good and can be used.

No doubt.

On researchgate.net <http://researchgate.net> there are 3 running discussion about gravity. Of course 80% of all posters just want to promote new ideas and sometimes one is OK. (myself included..)

https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_ultimate_reason_for_the_gravitational_force <https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_ultimate_reason_for_the_gravitational_force> https://www.researchgate.net/post/An_old_question_that_is_still_fresh_Is_gravity_a_Newtonian_force_or_Einstein_space-time_curvature <https://www.researchgate.net/post/An_old_question_that_is_still_fresh_Is_gravity_a_Newtonian_force_or_Einstein_space-time_curvature>

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_a_solid_counter-argument_against_Dingles_old_objection_to_Relativity_Theory/680 <https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_there_a_solid_counter-argument_against_Dingles_old_objection_to_Relativity_Theory/680>

Another idea I came across is that gravity is a result of time dilation!
This idea as it was relayed (by a believer in SR who was teaching it as fact. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxQTvqcpSg&; <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxQTvqcpSg&;>

But, rather than the explanation he gives, it makes me think the following. What if every bit of space emits pressure, well space would expand (hmmm, it seems to) and where time dilation is present there would be less emission!
And as such there would be a push towards such space.

Only one thing is clear, general relativity is a marginal, just mathematical model once the Nobel committee called unphysical. It is brilliant math and of no use for our real world, that urgently needs a new "infinite" and cheap energy source. May be even that is a bad idea as long as the (fascist finance) pigs have the power and we then would help them to further destroy the planet.

PS: Invest your thinking for the progress of mankind not for reasoning about the morgue of standard model "physics"

Well, if people can realize it is false then mankind would make better progress.

It is far from my main thrust.

Reply via email to