I do not claim and did not deny for the possibility of collusion.
This is that issue which I am no ready to discuss here and today.
Three Experiments Challenging SRT
- Thread starter Masterov
- Start date
This is that issue which I am no ready to discuss here and today.
So you deny reality and substitute it with your own fantasy. How utterly odd that is.:shrug:
No exist an experiment in which the slowing down time was the place to be in really.
I'll give an example:
Known experiment on the accelerator, which flew from the target the tau-lepton.
The lifetime of the particle $$2.9 10^{-13}c$$.
During this time, the particle flew a greater distance than it could overcome, even if it was moving at light speed.
From this fact was made an erroneous conclusion that there was a time dilation.
The error is that the restriction on the velocity of the particles postulated SRT.
The restriction on the rate exists only in theory.
Experiment, this limitation has not been proven.
Tau-lepton could move faster than light.
Learn some relativistic physics. I can't believe this completely ignorant argument. Let's get this straight. You're telling us your theory can't explain this phenomena. Pathetic garbage. Data in nonsense out.
Ignorant?
It is possible.
But you did not offer arguments at all.
You generate a not furnished with proof allegations.
The proof is the experiments description using SR. It's proven to be correct in every test and in particle experiments every day. The reason is the PROPER length measured in the tau-lepton rocket frame is < the Proper length measured in the laboratory frame. How can you claim your theory is more useful than SR when you don't understand the 'really simple stuff' to begin with. Relativity is a geometric theory where the components T and L are RELATIVE. IE RELATIVE not absolute as your analysis suggests. This isn't the first argument I've had, with you, where you stubbornly insist that you're RIGHT in the 'face of empirical evidence' that proofs you're WRONG. The other guy that wrote the paper, you linked, is beyond clueless. Just as Alphanumeric said.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/muon.html
Just another intellectually dishonest crank making a nuisance of yourself over the Internet. Quit asking folks to explain things to you that you should already understand if you actually understood relativistic physics as you so dishonestly claim. Every thing that comes out of your mouth proofs you're clueless. There should be a law against intellectual dishonesty. We could all meet up in the jail cell. You'd be going to prison as a multiple offender.
Last edited:
Only because you don't know the experiments done and their implications.
You'll give an example of no experiment? Or is this just as case of you done speak grammar good.
Firstly the velocities can be measured directly, hence how we know the distance they covered in the lab frame. That in itself demonstrates the tau didn't go faster than light. Secondly the amount of extra time the tau existed was in precise agreement with the prediction of relativity. It wasn't just "Relativity says time dilation and the tau lived longer!" but rather "Relativity predicts the tau should live for an extra X seconds. We observed it living an extra X seconds!". And thirdly accelerating (or decelerating) charged particles emit radiation. When a particle is moving faster than light in the local space it emits a very specific form of radiation known as Chernkov radiation. We observe this in water of nuclear reactors. It's the manner in which the SuperK and ICE neutrino telescopes work. It's a well measured, well understood phenomenon. If the tau moves faster than light then it's radiation signature would be of a particular form, different from when it is moving slower than light. We do not see the faster than light signature. Instead we see the predicted slower than light signature.
So by direct and indirect measurements of the tau velocity we can absolutely state it didn't move faster than light. Q E ****ing D.
When you derive SR you are comparing two similar triangles. You then find the relation between these triangles that would change a single value to maintain the same value for c (the speed of light). If you were to say that there were two relations between these triangles then you change the meaning of the statement, you in effect say that there is another triangle with this same relation to the other two. But, there is only one relation between the two triangles. This does not mean that only space or time is involved in the relation. I could just as well say that only time has dilation and space does not, but that would not be true. Velocity is space/time in the original equation, you can't say that only one is being affected and not the other when they are both being manipulated by the relation from the two triangles together as one single aspect. In other words, the relation is between two different coordinate planes, and both these planes have distance and time considered in them, so the relation is between spacetime not just space. So, spacetime is just an unwritten rule that says there can be only one relation between space and time in a single equation. It is the difference between both coordinate planes through time, not just the points between them. After all you do have to consider velocity to derive it, so then that is where they become treated as one single thing.
In this experiment, the rate of muons measured no one, since a instants of birth of the muon in the upper atmosphere is unknown.
If we assume that there was no time dilation, but muons moving faster than light, we got at least a logical explanation for the experiment.
It is possible.
Of the two of us, one person would be imprisoned.
This man (in my opinion) should be you.
Last edited:
It is not possible.
The accuracy of measurement of time of flight of modern devices hundreds of times less than that required to measure time $$10^{-13}c$$.
Last edited:
Your English is very good.
But my English is not sufficient to read long sentences.
Sorry.
Any scientific theory must be open to criticism.
SRT is closed to criticism of the theory.
SRT is not a scientific theory.
SRT is a religious doctrine, as applied to protect the SRT methods, which is unacceptable to apply for the protection of scientific theories.
To protect SRT applyed the methods by which the Church defended the religious doctrine in the Middle Ages.
The repetition of a simple experiment, which sold Mr. Liangzao FAN, will remove most of the claims to the SRT.
SRT is closed to criticism of the theory.
SRT is not a scientific theory.
SRT is a religious doctrine, as applied to protect the SRT methods, which is unacceptable to apply for the protection of scientific theories.
To protect SRT applyed the methods by which the Church defended the religious doctrine in the Middle Ages.
The repetition of a simple experiment, which sold Mr. Liangzao FAN, will remove most of the claims to the SRT.
That was demonstrated false last year when there was all the talk about possibly neutrinos going faster than light. People had, for a short time, evidence which made them question special relativity.
You are wrong. Inventing a conspiracy makes you look crazy.
I searched the Internet about bans criticism SRT:
In 1922 at its 100 th anniversary of the company "Gesellschaft Deutscher Naturforscher und Arzte" decided to eliminate any criticism of the official station in the academic environment. As a result, in 1922 in Germany for an academic press and media education ban on criticism of the theory of relativity, which operates to this day!
In 1934, in USSR published a special decree of CPSU (b) for discussion of relativism in which all opponents of the SRT are declared enemies of the people.
In 1942 at the anniversary session, devoted to 25th anniversary of the revolution, the Presidium of the USSR shall take special resolution on the theory of relativity: "The real science and philosophical content of the theory of relativity ... is a step forward in the opening of the dialectical laws of nature."
The third time, the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR passed a resolution banning criticism of the theory of relativity in science, education and academic print media, already in 1964 (according to this decree prohibited all scientific advice, magazines, academic departments to accept, consider, discuss and publish works critical of the Einstein's theory.)
In Zurich in 1917 by F. Adler (who wrote a critical work against MOT), then in Zurich (probably their psychiatrists were!) In 1930 at the Albert Einstein's son Edward (who claimed that by SR - Mileva Maric) disagree with the official views of the theory of relativity was subjected to involuntary psychiatric examination. For example, A. Bronstein in his book "Conversations about the cosmos and hypotheses," says: "... only for a 1966 Department of General and Applied Physics, USSR Academy of Sciences has helped doctors identify the 24 paranoid." That's because "no fire" acted inquisitorial new car.
In 1922 at its 100 th anniversary of the company "Gesellschaft Deutscher Naturforscher und Arzte" decided to eliminate any criticism of the official station in the academic environment. As a result, in 1922 in Germany for an academic press and media education ban on criticism of the theory of relativity, which operates to this day!
In 1934, in USSR published a special decree of CPSU (b) for discussion of relativism in which all opponents of the SRT are declared enemies of the people.
In 1942 at the anniversary session, devoted to 25th anniversary of the revolution, the Presidium of the USSR shall take special resolution on the theory of relativity: "The real science and philosophical content of the theory of relativity ... is a step forward in the opening of the dialectical laws of nature."
The third time, the Presidium of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR passed a resolution banning criticism of the theory of relativity in science, education and academic print media, already in 1964 (according to this decree prohibited all scientific advice, magazines, academic departments to accept, consider, discuss and publish works critical of the Einstein's theory.)
In Zurich in 1917 by F. Adler (who wrote a critical work against MOT), then in Zurich (probably their psychiatrists were!) In 1930 at the Albert Einstein's son Edward (who claimed that by SR - Mileva Maric) disagree with the official views of the theory of relativity was subjected to involuntary psychiatric examination. For example, A. Bronstein in his book "Conversations about the cosmos and hypotheses," says: "... only for a 1966 Department of General and Applied Physics, USSR Academy of Sciences has helped doctors identify the 24 paranoid." That's because "no fire" acted inquisitorial new car.
Last edited:
Where is a good conspirator when you need one? I don't see how we could ever change this guys mind, if the answer to his problems would always be in English that he can't understand. I think this a victim of "legitimate" scientific web sites that allow people to regect the notion that time exist or is an actual thing with properties. So now it has lead him to beleive that he has found actual science because somehow he got an equation right by only using one gamma for space and time, though I may be wrong about its correctness still. I didn't check it but it looked like he used tau for some reason, can't go wrong with that...
How ironic.....
Conspiracy?
But I have not talked about a conspiracy.
I did not say a one word about the conspiracy.
You talked about the conspiracy.
I did not.
A lie.
A lie. For example, I typed 'Lorentz violation, Russia' into Google and immediately got this paper. Someone at Moscow university considering what signatures violation of Lorentz invariance, a central concept of relativity, would have in particle physics. This is by no means an isolated paper. One of the main competitors to string theory is loop quantum gravity and it doesn't have special relativity as an underlying symmetry. A lot of buzz arose around the concept of Lorentz violating entropic gravity models a few years ago, it was in vogue in theoretical physics for about a year. It's called Horava gravity, named after a Czech physicist. Here is a paper on Lorentz violating models in Horava gravity written by some Germans. Here is a paper on it where one of the authors is Russian and it has been published in a reputable well known physics journal.
You claim there's an agreement across the physics research community, unknown to non-physicists, that any disagreement with relativity is ban from discussion and journals. That's a conspiracy! You're claiming there's a massive conspiracy. Just because you didn't say 'conspiracy' doesn't mean that isn't what you're describing. All your "Criticising relativity is banned!" nonsense can be disproven in 6 seconds using Google.
You've done nothing to check your facts because if you had you'd have found how laughably wrong you are. You can find published papers by people who disagree with all sorts of mainstream things. Special relativity, general relativity, quantum field theory, string theory etc. None of them are 'scared cows' but rather they have been worked on by so many people for so long that if someone claims to have found something extremely basic which invalids one of them then it's on them to provide clear justification. You have failed to do that. Instead you have succeeded in showing you're willfully ignorant and dishonest. Do you think lying is going to get people to listen to you? Do you think if you misrepresent scientists, lie about them, lie about their research, repeatedly lie and lie and lie, then somehow you'll become credible?
You're looking for an excuse for why no one takes you and your 'work' seriously. It isn't because discussion against SR is banned, it's because you're a dishonest nut.
You accuse me of something I never did.
I have not argued that there is a conspiracy.
It's you I impose this idea.
I have spoken only of the lobby: a group of people, a resource of which allows you to block the publication of scientific material, which contrary to the SRT.
I am constantly confronted with a ban on the publication of my material.
And arguments of opponents are either very weak or it is not at all.
My posts are deleted without explanation.
All the talk about the fairness of SRT will cease after will be repeated Liangzao FAN tests .
Enough to warm a piece of lead by electron beam and measure the temperature. If the temperature of lead continues to grow in proportion increase of potential of accelerating field, while the rate of electron is almost unchanged - SRT is true.
I have confidence that repeated Liangzao FAN tests will demonstrate: SRT is false.
My confidence has two bases:
1. Liangzao FAN tests were performed before, but none of them have been published.
It may have only a single explanation: these experiments contradict SRT.
2. Master Theory logically explains the reasons for the contradiction between experiment and theory (SRT).
______________________________________
Your efforts to stem the tide of scientific publications that will refute the SRT, will not give any results. Previously, you could control the printing press, but you can not undo the publicity on the Internet.
Publicity on Internet will make obvious (for all) falsity of SRT.
The plainness and obviousness of experimental verification of the validity of SRT (Liangzao FAN tests) will force to reflect on the causes and search for the authors of fraud in scientific community.
For a construction of accelerators have been spent a lot of money.
When becomes clear to all that this money has been wasted, then start searching for crooks who stole the money.
We should expect a huge scandal in the near future in physics.
Last edited: