edit: if one is dealing with a closed system only.
Firstly, your comments or questions have nothing to do with my level of 'fame'. Secondly, I don't want any fame. Thirdly, I'm not vitriolic because I am not famous, I'm vitriolic because I don't like liars, frauds and idiots and you're all three.
Unlike you I don't need to lie about my 'research'. This is me.
You keep saying "Relativity says....." and then something I know it doesn't. Or you claim relativity is inconsistent in an area I know it isn't. I ask you to demonstrate relativity is inconsistent or to back up your claims of what relativity says, so we can know relativity actually does say that and its not just you putting your misinterpretations into the mouth of relativity and you can't.
No, I will not because aside when I log onto SciForums and think "I wonder if that dumb lying dip**** has replied in Pseudoscience" I don't put a moments thought towards you and your delusional lies. I spend all day in a physics department or at home doing physics and never, not once, has a cranks comments made me stop, mid-work, and think "Perhaps this is wrong....?". You and other cranks are light amusement, like pointing at freaks in a travelling carnival was to people of the Mid-west 100 years ago.
Because the 5-30 minutes I might spend a day pointing out you can't support a single claim you make really eats into my time. You're hardly one to talk, 10 years 'researching' relativity and you haven't read a single book or paper on it? Now that's bad time management!
Just like your avoidance of backing up any of your claims about relativity has no place on a science forum.
SR wouldn't be killed on a forum, it would be killed in a journal. If someone has managed to kill it then it would be worth publishing. I am certain the person of which you speak will fail to find a publisher. A reputable publisher.
I think you are talking about the relativistic bicycle thread, in which the RPM's of the bike tire, being analogous to the bike's clock, time-dilate according to relativity. I don't want to link to it here, because that might be considered "thread necromancy", however I do recall that relativity theory was hard-pressed to explain that paradox.
The ironical thing about all this is that if people devoted only 1% of their time spent trying to find a SRT Loop hole in to actually proving or confirming that light travels as a photon/wave in the first instance not only would SRT be dead and buried the whole of Physics would be pointed towards the 23rd century.
The wave/particle nature of the photon is independent of the validity of special relativity. Special relativity was developed before light was known to be a photon, a quantum object. Special relativity works whether light is a wave as Maxwell described it or a tiny 'cannon ball' as Newton saw it. The packet nature of light has long since been demonstrated in experiments, we've moved onto such amazing things as using single photons and single electrons to act as switches inside computers, trying to make quantum or optical computers.
What is absurd is how remarkably stupid and how much of a liar you are. See that giant ball of light in the sky for about 12 hours each day? You're viewing light it released 8.5 minutes ago about 96 million miles away, through 'vacant space'.
Show me a photon moving across vacant space then....bet you can't...and you have the nerve to call me a liar....
Are you telling me you can't see the Sun?
The particle of gravitation is much harder to see because it's so much weaker than the photon, weak bosons or gluons. We currently do not have the technology to see such short range weak effects, just as 100 years ago we didn't have the technology to see quarks. It is not that someone has said "This experiment will see a single graviton" and it didn't, it's that the experiments which could hope to see the graviton are not currently doable with our technology.
The Sun and all other objects out in space are seen by photons emitted from them, either in visible light frequencies or in other ones. The fact we can see stars shows light moves through 'vacant space'. In the case of very dim, very distant stars we've done observations so careful that they detect individual photons from them. Alternatively, in labs lasers can be shot through evacuated chambers (ie vacuums) and individual photons have been observed. The LHC (and all other particle acclerators like LEP and Fermilab and SLAC) works by smashing together particles inside vacuums so good they are better than the vacuum of space and individual photons have been measured moving through detectors.
Are you claiming photons don't move? Do exactly does the light from the Sun get to your eyes then? Magic? If an object starts at point A and is then seen in Point B some time later is it not logical to think it might have moved?
wow the religious nutters are going to have a field day with this one.....[chuckle]
uhm...the thread title is?
How is it anecdotal? It's done in the same way other things have their velocities measured. Bullet speeds are measured by firing guns over a known distance and timing how long it takes to go from the gun to the target. Light speed is measured (this is just one way, there's many) by timing how long it takes for light to go from a laser, over a set distance and to hit a detector.
It's true that gravitational propogation speeds are done indirectly, due to the reason I gave in my previous post, we cannot make effects strong enough or measure precisely enough direct changes in a gravitational field. You can't just turn on a 'gravity light' like you can turn on a laser. But there's several ways to indirectly measure the speed of gravity and they all agree and put it to within a few percent of the speed of light.
It's a fact you've never studied special relativity. Or electromagnetism. Or general relativity. Or classical mechanics. Or quantum mechanics. And it's clear from your posts you've put in very very little effort to research the things you make claims about. So either you are ignorant or you're deliberately deceiving. I would say it's both, you are ignorant and in order to cover that up and to serve your biased agenda you lie. Have you ever studied those things? Could you sit down right now and pass a 2nd or 3rd year university physics exam on the topics I just mentioned?
