Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: "Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity"

Expand Messages
  • Paul Hoiland <paultrr2000@yahoo.com>
    Actually that does not suprize me. I know of several field theorists, like myself that do not favor the old traditional strick SR. I favor a modified
    Message 1 of 13 , Jan 29, 2003
      Actually that does not suprize me. I know of several field
      theorists, like myself that do not favor the old traditional strick
      SR. I favor a modified version, that takes some of the
      developments in String Theory with certain FTL states into
      account. However, I have yet to find a reason to actually abandone
      Lorentz Invariance. Every state I have ever actually examined from
      those theories still obeys it once you substitute the different
      value for C in. Dirac during some of his early modeling of the
      electron came across a simular aspects. Internal within the
      electron he discovered a state where our C value didn't hold. But
      he also showed it still obeyed Lorentz Invariance. So yes, some of
      us do complain about SR. We complain about the strick rendering on
      C a lot. But most of us who do have also worked with the models of
      Cosmology. In that field at present we have observed effects out
      there that seem to be telling us C has varied over time.
    • Jack Martinelli
      ... I ve seen this a few times, and something I ve wondered about is whether or not Dirac considered the proper time and proper length of an electron. I.e.,
      Message 2 of 13 , Jan 29, 2003
        >Internal within the electron he discovered a state where our C
        value didn't hold
         
        I've seen this a few times, and something I've wondered about is whether or not Dirac considered the proper time and proper length of an electron.  I.e., the value of c that we can measure for an electron's internal states might differ from standard c.  But an "electron-resident" kinda guy might measure the speed limit of the universe to be exactly what us ordinary matter guys measure.  To me this makes good sense.  I can think of no reason why an electron's clock should tick at the same rate as an ordinary matter clock.  I can also not imagine why an electron's natural unit of length should match ours.
         
        Regards
         
        Jack Martinelli
         
         
      • Robert Neil Boyd
        Hi Adrian, You said, ...we are INSIDE a UNI-verse with NO WAY to get out. This is not at all accurate. I can inform you how to physically transport yourself
        Message 3 of 13 , Jan 30, 2003
          Hi Adrian,

          You said, "...we are INSIDE a UNI-verse with NO WAY to get out."

          This is not at all accurate. I can inform you how to physically
          transport yourself to many other realities with one of several
          Consciousness-based methods. (If you are interested, contact me off
          list.) And aren't you forgetting that there is more than one universe,
          more than one dimension, more than one realm of Existance?

          Neil
        • afme@ihug.co.nz
          Sorry Neil, That s all part of the UNI-verse. I don t confuse the UNI-verse with our spectrum or world, or the physical. Adrian. ... From: Robert Neil Boyd
          Message 4 of 13 , Jan 30, 2003
            Sorry Neil,

            That's all part of the UNI-verse. I don't confuse the UNI-verse with our spectrum or world, or the
            physical. Adrian.



            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Robert Neil Boyd" <rnboyd@...>
            To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 3:32 AM
            Subject: Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: "Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity"


            > Hi Adrian,
            >
            > You said, "...we are INSIDE a UNI-verse with NO WAY to get out."
            >
            > This is not at all accurate. I can inform you how to physically
            > transport yourself to many other realities with one of several
            > Consciousness-based methods. (If you are interested, contact me off
            > list.) And aren't you forgetting that there is more than one universe,
            > more than one dimension, more than one realm of Existance?
            >
            > Neil
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...
            >
            > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >
          • Paul Hoiland <paultrr2000@yahoo.com>
            A lot of Dirac s ideas on that we generally over looked. It wasn t till modern QED and even later String Theory stated mentioning odd states that some of
            Message 5 of 13 , Jan 30, 2003
              A lot of Dirac's ideas on that we generally over looked. It wasn't
              till modern QED and even later String Theory stated mentioning odd
              states that some of this resurfaced a bit. However, its far from a
              settled issue. Personally I tend towards a scale variable C with
              the closer we get to the Plank scale after a point you begin to, via
              QM's probability wave to see why its possible velocity changes close
              to the Plank scale. It would explain a lot of QM's non-local
              effects.
            • Robert Neil Boyd
              OK. :) The same thing by many different names. I call it the Multiverse, or sometimes, the Omniverse. Anyway, there s a lot more than just this particular
              Message 6 of 13 , Jan 31, 2003
                OK. :)

                The same thing by many different names. I call it the Multiverse, or sometimes, the Omniverse.

                Anyway, there's a lot more than just this particular infinite volume universe, etc.

                Neil

                afme@... wrote:
                Sorry Neil,

                That's all part of the UNI-verse. I don't confuse the UNI-verse with our spectrum or world, or the
                physical. Adrian.



                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "Robert Neil Boyd" <rnboyd@...>
                To: <forcefieldpropulsionphysics@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 3:32 AM
                Subject: Re: [forcefieldpropulsionphysics] Re: "Experimental Disproof of Special Relativity"


                Hi Adrian,

                You said, "...we are INSIDE a UNI-verse with NO WAY to get out."

                This is not at all accurate. I can inform you how to physically
                transport yourself to many other realities with one of several
                Consciousness-based methods. (If you are interested, contact me off
                list.) And aren't you forgetting that there is more than one universe,
                more than one dimension, more than one realm of Existance?

                Neil




                To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...

                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.co m/info/terms/





                To Post a message, send it to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics@...

                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: forcefieldpropulsionphysics-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.