1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.MATH

  • Re: Experiments on the validity of Relativity

    From Odelyn Murov Verba@21:1/5 to Luigi Fortunati on Wed May 15 12:42:17 2024
    XPost: sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity

    Luigi Fortunati wrote:

    I have demonstrated in every possible way (with well-illustrated thought experiments via Geogebra) that it is a huge mistake, because two massive bodies (which fall gravitationally and freely towards each other) *accelerate* both in the reference of one and both in that of the other.

    this is incorrect, I beg you to reconsider. Here is the proof

    https://b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/8eIMKIBQ3dJj

    https://b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/dYCGUp3gXi6e

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paden Babansky@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Thu May 16 21:43:34 2024
    XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics

    Tom Roberts wrote:

    On 5/13/24 1:58 AM, Luigi Fortunati wrote:
    When there is an experiment that proves Einstein right, the whole world
    is ready to praise him and his theories (and rightly so). However, it
    is not right that, when an experiment proves Einstein wrong, no one
    admits it and no one talks about it.

    This last is just plain wrong. Any REAL experiment that refuted either
    SR or GR would be GREAT NEWS and the experimenters would win praise and accolades. But they must be real experiments within the domain of applicability of the theory, and statistically inconsistent with its predictions. To date no such experiments have ever been published --
    your allegations here are just drivel: they are not real experiments,
    and they indicate that YOU do not understand General Relativity, because
    your claims are based upon a PUN on the word "acceleration".

    this is incompleteness. I already proved Einstine inconsitent and a joke in science, hence physics, with my "On the Divergent Matter of the Moving Koerpers Model", where Gravity is about superpositioning the amplitude probability distribution, say Earth
    and another object whereever displace in space. Absolutely.

    you can't expect bigger news in physics than that. The Einstine was terribly dumb in quantum mechanics, which explain he didn't undrestand the thing. The Einstine was absent at what is going on. I came to think on this illustration.

    https://static-3.b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/live/cover_images/UnuX7D6YRyiE/KVAaoMRJiVVX_640x360.jpg

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Prudencio Hazbulatov@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Thu May 16 22:00:09 2024
    XPost: sci.physics.relativity, sci.physics

    Tom Roberts wrote:

    On 5/13/24 1:58 AM, Luigi Fortunati wrote:
    Einstein says that bodies in free fall are at rest and that the man
    inside the falling elevator experiences no forces or accelerations.

    No. This is A LOT more subtle. So much so that this claim is just plain wrong. You MUST learn about the actual theory before you can have any
    hope of refuting it. All you have done here is shown that your personal misconceptions are inconsistent with each other -- useless.

    I really don't undrestand how you guys don't undrestand my theory "𝗢𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲
    𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗞𝗼𝗲𝗿𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹", where as such, it's clear that the
    superpositioning of the amplitude probability distribution, making the
    whole thing. Or you guys are playing like "not undrestanding".

    is that just because I'm not a jew??

    here's smellensky, in cocaine like shit.

    𝗞𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗼𝘃_𝗥𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗼𝗻_-_ 𝗭𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗸𝘆_𝘀𝗮𝘆𝘀_𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘆_𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻_𝗲𝘅𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗹𝘆_𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁_𝗯𝘂𝘁_𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿_𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼

    https://b%69%74%63%68%75te.com/%76%69%64eo/WBXKRopo2Ast

    which is not true. I bet he is not saying anything.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)