Two Errors In Relativity

a reply to: Kashai

I agree with Arbitrageur as well as Dragonridr your position has no basis in fact.

Yes it has, it is based on the results of these experiments that you never heard of.

a reply to: BakedCrusader


I would take this opportunity to ask that you provide your data that you claim I have never seen?

a reply to: Kashai

The data you still haven't been able to identify?

a reply to: BakedCrusader


That is not a relevant response its like suggesting God exist because modern science has not discovered that God exist.


Such a consideration realistically is outside the preview of modern science you should check back with them in about 42 trillion years and guess what?

Its probably still outside of the preview of what is then modern science.

Science is not about pet theories related to what is not understood by science.


Myself I have a Myriad of pet theories in that regard but I do not submit them to this forum.

a reply to: Kashai

I am pointing out the direct implications of experimental results of for instance the Michelson/Morley experiment and Michelson/Gale experiment. The (deliberate?) false or misrepresented conclusions of these experiments are errors in relativity. The only one that is constantly off topic is you......

a reply to: BakedCrusader


Only because and in all sincerity I see no reason to take you seriously.

Data that you claim I have never seen proving that the Earth is at the center of the Universe?????

Still waiting.....

a reply to: Kashai

Data that you claim I have never seen proving that the Earth is at the center of the Universe?????

I just posted the names of the experiments I was talking about(again). If you are refering to the sidenote I made about the distribution of cosmic background radiation, go google it.

No I am pointing out that while to be certain as an individual member of Science & Technology at ATS, I am not others who post here .

in my opinion you position has no merit.

Again strictly speaking for myself.

a reply to: Kashai

Well you are not touching it either, so your presence is irrelevant together with your opinion.

originally posted by: BakedCrusader
a reply to: Kashai

Well you are not touching it either, so your presence is irrelevant together with your opinion.

Such an opinion is also outside the preview of this forum in my opinion.

Sticks and Stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.

Seriously are you familiar with an alternative definition of the words, "hind end of an over weight Ratus"

Guess how much your personal comments are relevant to me.

a reply to: Kashai

I think we are done here, don't you? Unless you have something to say? Don't direct any more off topic posts at me, ok? Good.

a reply to: BakedCrusader


Agreed unless other members would care to respond?

So to reiterate, the Michelson/Morley experiment proves that either there is no Aether, or the Earth is stationary.

The Micholson/Gale experiment proves that the Earth is rotating through a stationary Aether with the speed we expect, OR, the Aether rotates around a motionless Earth. In any case it proves an Aether.

Therefore the Michelson/Morley experiment proves a stationary Earth.