• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Does CERN prove Einstein wrong?

Anders Lindman said:
Change of clock rates is not the same as bending time. Time is not a dimension.
Click to expand...

Bare assertion in the face of experimental data that shows you are wrong. You claim that time isn't affected by motion, but we have experiments that confirm the predictions based on a model which treats time as affected by motion. You claim time is not affected by gravitation, but we have increadibly precise experiments that confirm the predictions based on a model which treats time as affected by gravitation. You have no examples of an experimental result that is not consistent with those models.

But you do have bare assertion, which I suppose is enough for some.
 
Roboramma said:
Of course it can't, if you are doing the experiment with the equipment in your lab. Or did you think that the lab was traveling with the photon?
Click to expand...

There are two photons plus the lab. If the theory can't deal with that then that's a monstrous limitation already there. Let's have the lab as a frame of reference. What is the velocity between the photons from the lab's point of reference?
 
Anders Lindman said:
There are two photons plus the lab. If the theory can't deal with that then that's a monstrous limitation already there. Let's have the lab as a frame of reference. What is the velocity between the photons from the lab's point of reference?
Click to expand...

It can deal with that, so there's no problem. And the equipment in the lab will measure the distance between the photons increasing at 2c. But that doesn't contradict relativity.
 
Anders Lindman said:
There are two photons plus the lab. If the theory can't deal with that then that's a monstrous limitation already there. Let's have the lab as a frame of reference. What is the velocity between the photons from the lab's point of reference?
Click to expand...

Just to be clear: the theory tells us the velocity of one photon from a frame inertial with respect to the other: it's c. But you haven't offered an experiment that is capable of measuring that value.

The experiment that you offered is capable of measuring the velocities of the photons relative to the lab. And its results, as you have already given, will be just as is predicted by relativity.
 
Roboramma said:
Bare assertion in the face of experimental data that shows you are wrong. You claim that time isn't affected by motion, but we have experiments that confirm the predictions based on a model which treats time as affected by motion. You claim time is not affected by gravitation, but we have increadibly precise experiments that confirm the predictions based on a model which treats time as affected by gravitation. You have no examples of an experimental result that is not consistent with those models.

But you do have bare assertion, which I suppose is enough for some.
Click to expand...

Think about it. Do you really believe that someone traveling in a rocket around Earth near the speed of light would speed up the entire universe?
 
Anders, here's an experiment for you: I am traveling at 0.9 c in the toward you x direction, and I encounter a photon sent from you, and thus moving toward me in the x direction. I measure it's velocity. I then encounter another photon, sent from my sister ship which is stationary relative to me (and thus also moving toward your at 0.9 c), moving toward me in the y direction.

When I measure their velocities, what will I get?
 
Roboramma said:
Just to be clear: the theory tells us the velocity of one photon from a frame inertial with respect to the other: it's c. But you haven't offered an experiment that is capable of measuring that value.

The experiment that you offered is capable of measuring the velocities of the photons relative to the lab. And its results, as you have already given, will be just as is predicted by relativity.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you do admit that the velocity between the photons from the lab's reference frame is 2c? Because the theory only deals with one object. Fair enough. But then the theory can only deal with a universe with one particle in it. Not very useful.
 
Roboramma said:
Anders, here's an experiment for you: I am traveling at 0.9 c in the toward you x direction, and I encounter a photon sent from you, and thus moving toward me in the x direction. I measure it's velocity. I then encounter another photon, sent from my sister ship which is stationary relative to me (and thus also moving toward your at 0.9 c), moving toward me in the y direction.

When I measure their velocities, what will I get?
Click to expand...

You would measure the photon from me as moving towards you at 1.9c. And the other photon at 1c.
 
Anders Lindman said:
We can take two photons traveling in space in opposite directions without Earth as a reference frame. The relative velocity between them is two times the speed of light.
Click to expand...

The relative nature of time and space, i.e. time dilation and length contraction, have been experimentally verified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity

If you observe from your reference frame two objects moving in opposite directions with a speed v they will have a relative velocity between them of less than 2v in the reference frame of either object. If v < .1 c then 2v will be an acceptable approximation in most circumstances, but the difference is measurable.

GPS-satellites adjust for both special and general relativity at the exact rates predicted by those two theories. What is more likely? That the world's physicists are mistaken about important theories and the GPS-satellites accidentally require the exact adjustments predicted if time and space are relative? Or that you're woefully and willfully ignorant?
 
bjornart said:
The relative nature of time and space, i.e. time dilation and length contraction, have been experimentally verified. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity

If you observe from your reference frame two objects moving in opposite directions with a speed v they will have a relative velocity between them of less than 2v in the reference frame of either object. If v < .1 c then 2v will be an acceptable approximation in most circumstances, but the difference is measurable.

GPS-satellites adjust for both special and general relativity at the exact rates predicted by those two theories. What is more likely? That the world's physicists are mistaken about important theories and the GPS-satellites accidentally require the exact adjustments predicted if time and space are relative? Or that you're woefully and willfully ignorant?
Click to expand...

So you blindly trust those experiments? I don't.
 
And also, if I traveled 0.8c away from the sun the photons from the sun would approach me at 0.2c.
 
I used to think it was rare to meet someone quite so proudly ignorant, but relativity deniers seem to be all too common around here.
 
And, space can actually be considered as an absolute frame of reference, since space is not empty but contains large amounts of vacuum energy.

Dark energy is another totally false theory. The redshift of photons is caused by friction between the photons and the vacuum energy.
 
They have already tested it during two or three years.
And they still don't want to publish it. Because they are afraid.

What more do you need to except the truth that E=mc^2 is falsified as being pseudoscience. As nonsense.

We read:

"Over 3 years, OPERA researchers timed the roughly 16,000 neutrinos that started at CERN and registered a hit in the detector. They found that, on average, the neutrinos made the 730-kilometer, 2.43-millisecond trip roughly 60 nanoseconds faster than expected if they were traveling at light speed."

16.000 experiments.
I think there is a cognitive bias not to accept evidence of the contrary in science.
What more prove do you need to except that a part of the scientific worldview till know was based on pure nonsense.
The math failed. E=mc^2 is at the same level as homeopathic ideas. It's nonsense.
16.000 experiments, and still you can not except the truth?
I think Einstein was wrong.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom