ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 3rd January 2019, 01:07 PM   #41
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Surely you're joking.

Can you provide evidence that there is no effect of Fizeau in the galactic atmosphere?
Perhaps if you could describe, quantitatively, what you mean by “effect of Fizeau in the galactic atmosphere”, I may be able to provide some.

AFAIK, “Fizeau” is the name of a 19th century physicist. Long since dead. Hard to imagine how a dead person can affect the IGM!

Oh, I note that you did not answer my other questions; why is that, may I ask?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 01:20 PM   #42
Dr.Sid
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Olomouc, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,765
I think this is relevant to your theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunnin...3Kruger_effect

Possibly also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble

Or this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Don't be sad about it, it happened to everyone at some point ..
Dr.Sid is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 01:31 PM   #43
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
AFAIK, “Fizeau” is the name of a 19th century physicist. Long since dead. Hard to imagine how a dead person can affect the IGM!
So you don't know Fizeau.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 01:36 PM   #44
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
So you don't know Fizeau.
Of course not.

He died quite a few years before I was born, so how could I know him?

But perhaps you meant something like “know of Fizeau”? If so, please say so.

FWIW, I note that there are, to me, many instances of this kind of thing in what you write, both here and in your GS document. I recommend that you try harder to say, clearly, what you mean.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 01:58 PM   #45
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
I think this is relevant to your theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunnin...3Kruger_effect

Possibly also this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble

Or this ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Don't be sad about it, it happened to everyone at some point ..
I will take a note. Thank you.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 02:11 PM   #46
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,629
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what.
And this, as usual, is where the conspiracy theories start; all the scientific establishment is conspiring to preserve the scientific orthodoxy and refuses to publish anything that challenges it. It's ironic, of course, that Einstein is so often cited as the beneficiary of this conspiracy, given how much his theories demolished the scientific orthodoxy of the 19th century; and even more ironic given that the aim of the conspiracy theorists seems always to be to resurrect that orthodoxy.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 02:16 PM   #47
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
And this, as usual, is where the conspiracy theories start; all the scientific establishment is conspiring to preserve the scientific orthodoxy and refuses to publish anything that challenges it. It's ironic, of course, that Einstein is so often cited as the beneficiary of this conspiracy, given how much his theories demolished the scientific orthodoxy of the 19th century; and even more ironic given that the aim of the conspiracy theorists seems always to be to resurrect that orthodoxy.

Dave
Call it as you wish, Dave. Can you show a real critical article about relativity in a scientific establishment journal?
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 02:56 PM   #48
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Call it as you wish, Dave. Can you show a real critical article about relativity in a scientific establishment journal?
Surely this is a joke, right?

How about Bekenstein (2004): https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/a...o-ph%2F0403694 ? 971 citations.

Just a few minutes on a site like ADS will yield thousands of papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, proposing alternatives to Einstein’s relativity!
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 03:03 PM   #49
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Surely this is a joke, right?

How about Bekenstein (2004): https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/a...o-ph%2F0403694 ? 971 citations.

Just a few minutes on a site like ADS will yield thousands of papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, proposing alternatives to Einstein’s relativity!
It says:
"Relativistic gravitation theory"

Is this a critique to relativity?

They propose another relativity and worst one.

Last edited by Emil; 3rd January 2019 at 03:37 PM.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 03:07 PM   #50
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
It says:
"Relativistic gravitation theory"

Is this a critique to relativity?
Why not answer your own question?

If you read the paper, you’ll see that he does more than make a lame critique, he proposes an alternative theory!
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 03:22 PM   #51
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
<snip>

They propose another relativity and wost one.
“wost”?

So?

This paper proposes an alternative to Einstein’s theory. Published in a relevant, peer-reviewed journal.

Exactly what you asked for!
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 03:55 PM   #52
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,716
Originally Posted by Skeptical Greg View Post
Space is not empty, and it surely is a "medium"..
That can’t be right.
At least an XXXL?

Space is pretty big
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 05:13 PM   #53
The Sparrow
Graduate Poster
 
The Sparrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Central Canada
Posts: 1,658
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what. ...
LOL.

The "mainstream science community" (sinister music) won't publish my amazing new facts, so instead I will post them on a skeptic board with the hope of..........of......... of what exactly?
The Sparrow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 06:22 PM   #54
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Chill out, mate!
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 06:52 PM   #55
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,629
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Call it as you wish, Dave. Can you show a real critical article about relativity in a scientific establishment journal?
This is called "reversing the burden of proof". Your claim is that "The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what." Please provide evidence for it. Note that a lack of papers offering alternative theories to SR and GR is not evidence for the claim, as this is simply accounted for by there being no relevant experimental evidence that is unexplained by these theories and explained by any alternative.

If you have no evidence for your claim, it will not be taken seriously.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:05 PM   #56
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
This is called "reversing the burden of proof". Your claim is that "The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what." Please provide evidence for it. Note that a lack of papers offering alternative theories to SR and GR is not evidence for the claim, as this is simply accounted for by there being no relevant experimental evidence that is unexplained by these theories and explained by any alternative.

If you have no evidence for your claim, it will not be taken seriously.

Dave
I tried several times unsuccessfully, some 15 years ago. And I know people like me, who also tried unsuccessfully. And the best prove is the lack of real criticism in the mainstream science journals, and the abundance of pseudo-science in them. For example, do you think that this is science:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaye...quantum_eraser
And what you expect from these scientists?

Last edited by Emil; 3rd January 2019 at 07:07 PM.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:16 PM   #57
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,645
While I am fully aware that academic credentials are not required to develop a scientific hypothesis, theory, or experiment, I am curious- do you have an advanced education in a relevant field of physics? Or are you largely self-educated?
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:24 PM   #58
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
While I am fully aware that academic credentials are not required to develop a scientific hypothesis, theory, or experiment, I am curious- do you have an advanced education in a relevant field of physics? Or are you largely self-educated?
Hi Steve. I have advanced specialized self-education, believe it or not. That article of mine is only the tip of the iceberg.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:35 PM   #59
MEequalsIxR
Critical Thinker
 
MEequalsIxR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 292
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what.

[snip]
They don't publish it when it's incomplete or nonsense. But if it had merit they'd want it. Perhaps you could take some of the criticism offered to improve your theory so it's publishable.

What is it you have against Einstein and why do you think what you have offer explains things better than he did.
MEequalsIxR is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:40 PM   #60
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,645
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Hi Steve. I have advanced specialized self-education, believe it or not. That article of mine is only the tip of the iceberg.
Thanks for the response.

My own physics background is just standard college stuff from along time ago plus many years of trying to follow threads like this. I often feel out of my depth and seldom comment. I think it helps me to know some background of the main participants.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 07:53 PM   #61
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 20,157
I bet this paper contains no mathematical model at all. Cranks almost never understand the language of physics (mathematics) or its works.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

Last edited by Sideroxylon; 3rd January 2019 at 07:54 PM.
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 08:19 PM   #62
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by MEequalsIxR View Post
They don't publish it when it's incomplete or nonsense. But if it had merit they'd want it. Perhaps you could take some of the criticism offered to improve your theory so it's publishable.

What is it you have against Einstein and why do you think what you have offer explains things better than he did.
Good advice, however criticism of relativity is forbidden. For example, the results of Eddington's experiment 1919 are fake but that's ok. Some link on that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_ixkOI4k8c
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 08:28 PM   #63
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
I bet this paper contains no mathematical model at all. Cranks almost never understand the language of physics (mathematics) or its works.
Are you crank?
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 09:01 PM   #64
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 20,157
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Are you crank?
Humility and a love of the history of science means I have never bought into egalitarian views of knowledge where any Tom, Dick or Mary gets to confidently gainsay expert consensus.

Past experience with people with claims like yours says you don’t have mathematical models at all let alone ones that do a better job of those used to make predictions and underpin technology.

Am I right?
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 10:14 PM   #65
Cheetah
Graduate Poster
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,252
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
The so-called "relevant" journals do not publish criticism of Einstein, no matter what.

For very good reasons.

How could anyone take any criticism of Einsteins work seriously?
It has passed all tests thrown at it with flying colours. There is absolutely no doubt it works. Rock solid experimental evidence proves it.

If you think you have found fault with it, you are obviously mistaken.
Reality proves you wrong.
__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB

Last edited by Cheetah; 3rd January 2019 at 10:18 PM.
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 10:31 PM   #66
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
Humility and a love of the history of science means I have never bought into egalitarian views of knowledge where any Tom, Dick or Mary gets to confidently gainsay expert consensus.

Past experience with people with claims like yours says you don’t have mathematical models at all let alone ones that do a better job of those used to make predictions and underpin technology.

Am I right?
As far as I am concerned, no.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2019, 10:33 PM   #67
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Cheetah View Post
For very good reasons.

How could anyone take any criticism of Einsteins work seriously?
It has passed all tests thrown at it with flying colours. There is absolutely no doubt it works. Rock solid experimental evidence proves it.

If you think you have found fault with it, you are obviously mistaken.
Reality proves you wrong.
Good one.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 12:26 AM   #68
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 20,157
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
As far as I am concerned, no.
Is that a negative on you providing anything in the language of science? Nothing quantitative? No mathematical model of your new the physics that you think is superior to actual models that provide the foundations for real world technology? Without the math, you have nothing of value and without an understanding of the current mathematical models, you have no business asserting they are faulty.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

Last edited by Sideroxylon; 4th January 2019 at 12:38 AM.
Sideroxylon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 12:38 AM   #69
This is The End
 
This is The End's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,677
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Hi Steve. I have advanced specialized self-education, believe it or not.

We can only not believe it; since it is quite impossible to "self-educate" as far as the mathematics side of physics is concerned.


And that is because mathematics as we know it is the result of countless life-times of man hours by many brilliant mathematicians building upon each others work. No one person could achieve all of that by themselves if they each had to start from nothing.

Unless perhaps you meant you took online courses? Which would technically not be "self" education. If so, which online courses did you take?
__________________
________________________
This is The End is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 12:53 AM   #70
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,344
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Good advice, however criticism of relativity is forbidden. For example, the results of Eddington's experiment 1919 are fake but that's ok. Some link on that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_ixkOI4k8c
A YT video as evidence?

You do know, don’t you, that the 1919 results have been extensively and independently analyzed? That the experiment has been replicated many times, and often with far greater accuracy and precision? That quite a few amateur astronomers have also done so too? That the HIPPARCOS and GAIA data reductions make sense only by including the light bending per Einstein (not Newton)?

No one is forbidden from doing their own Eddington-like experiment. No one is forbidden from downloading the HIPPARCOS data and doing their own analyses. Etc.

And as I already noted, proposing an alternative theory, to Einstein’s, is far more powerful than mere criticism. And it’s been done hundreds, if not thousands of times.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 02:16 AM   #71
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 28,629
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
I have advanced specialized self-education, believe it or not.
Funnily enough, that statement doesn't give you any crackpot index points, though I think it ought to. Everything else you've posted, on the other hand...

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 02:27 AM   #72
Worm
Master Poster
 
Worm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Dundee
Posts: 2,556
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Yes these experiments are yet to be done, and yes I am sure about the results of the experiments;
Wow.
__________________
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" Isaac Asimov

Not all cults are bad - I've joined a cult of niceness
Worm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 03:57 AM   #73
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 10,786
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Good advice, however criticism of relativity is forbidden.
The publication of experimental results which appear to contradict relativity is certainly not forbidden, there was a case a few years ago that had quite a lot of publicity. Turned out to be due to faulty equipment, but it proves that such results are not suppressed: quite the reverse, there was a lot of excitement about them.

So when you've actually done your 'simple experiments' and produced results which do indeed contradict relativity you should have no difficulty getting them published. Until then you've got nothing.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 04:53 AM   #74
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 11,831
Originally Posted by This is The End View Post

Unless perhaps you meant you took online courses? Which would technically not be "self" education. If so, which online courses did you take?
People learn things from books too. There's nothing impossible about attaining a deep understanding of modern physics without a traditional education, or even a teacher.

I doubt it's very common, though.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 10:44 AM   #75
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Funnily enough, that statement doesn't give you any crackpot index points[/url], though I think it ought to. Everything else you've posted, on the other hand...
Give more power to the engine Dave.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 10:46 AM   #76
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Worm View Post
Wow.
LOL
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 10:49 AM   #77
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
People learn things from books too. There's nothing impossible about attaining a deep understanding of modern physics without a traditional education, or even a teacher.

I doubt it's very common, though.
Exactly. Thank you.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 11:42 AM   #78
Emil
Scholar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
The publication of experimental results which appear to contradict relativity is certainly not forbidden, there was a case a few years ago that had quite a lot of publicity. Turned out to be due to faulty equipment, but it proves that such results are not suppressed: quite the reverse, there was a lot of excitement about them.

So when you've actually done your 'simple experiments' and produced results which do indeed contradict relativity you should have no difficulty getting them published. Until then you've got nothing.
In the "science" business, you can publish only pseudo-criticism of relativity, just for fun.

As for my article, you are right, it is possible although very difficult to be published in mainstream journal. luckily there are other journals.

Thanks.
Emil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 11:45 AM   #79
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,175
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
The link is not active because this is my first post. ...
There's a reason for that.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th January 2019, 11:47 AM   #80
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,175
Originally Posted by Emil View Post
Nice questions WhatRoughBeast. I'll try to keep it simple.

Yes these experiments are yet to be done, and yes I am sure about the results of the experiments; this is long story why.
I choose this type of expressing used also by Einstein with his gedanken experiments.

The interference needs Complete symmetry of the ray path, that is why is the first prism there.

You also can find calculation there, it is not perfect, but works.

This paper is preliminary, don't judge it too strong. I am making another paper.

Thank you again!
So this is you going around to forums to promote your own universe contemplating?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:52 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.