[Phys-L] Re: Assignment for Einsteinians

[Pentcho Valev <valevp@BAS.BG>]

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:46:17 -0400, Ludwik Kowalski
<kowalskil@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU> wrote:

> On Saturday, Jul 2, 2005, at 01:56 America/New_York, Pentcho Valev
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:07:16 -0400, Ludwik Kowalski
> > <kowalskil@MAIL.MONTCLAIR.EDU> wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday, Jul 1, 2005, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> > >
> > > > . . .  The problem with relativity is not that it is wrong;
> > > > rather, it leads to a destruction of rationality by forcing
> > > > people to think in terms of oxymorons . . . .
> > >
> > > Well, if the theory is correct then what is being criticized?
> > > I suppose it is the way in which the theory was derived.
> > > That is pedagogy. Better derivations, perhaps starting
> > > with different postulates, can probably be produced.
> >
> > No the theory is not correct (perhaps my English is not quite
> > correct as well). . . .
>
> Please describe an experiment contradicting special relativity.


In 1960 the frequency shift factor as light travels between the top of a
tower and the ground was confirmed to be 1+phi/c^2. It can be shown (see
http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev3.htm ) that this result contradicts the
postulate of constancy of speed of light (the c postulate) and is
consistent with its negation stating that the speed of light is variable
(the c+v postulate).

I am not sure if you accept reductio ad absurdum as a legitimate tool for
testing a theory (Einsteinians usually don't accept it). If you do, please
see
http://www.wbabin.net/valev/valev7.htm

Pentcho Valev
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l