Well, that sure made it easy for me. I don't EVER have to pay any attention to any experiment or testing again. I know it's false, a priori.
When you trot this guy out as a representative of the "scientific experts" you've studied and relied on, Marco, it becomes clear that your understanding of "science" is quite different than mine.
I have to assume that this guy's middle initial is short for "Crank."
His statement was:
In fact there can never be any experiment or testing whatsoever, including with GPS satellites, to verify Einstein's relativity because it contradicts absolute truth. (Vesselin C. Noninski)
Now this is a claim that IF you have a hypothesis that HAS been shown to be an IMPOSSIBILITY, then LOGICALLY and SCIENTIFICALLY the ONLY way to treat it is as an error. Someone who CLAIMS to have some supporting evidence to back up an recognized IMPOSSIBILITY, MUST according to the scientific method, and to rational thought, be REJECTED without consideration.
Such claims of supporting evidence of an impossible hypothesis would be the likes of "the Earth is flat".
Moronium, do you study the "supporting evidence" for flat Earth hypothesis? People offer their supporting evidence all the time.
You seem to think that supporting evidence can not be rejected, its BETTER than the theory itself, because you cant disagree with supporting evidence can you?
So in my understanding you have to put the horse before the cart. The soundness of the hypothesis is critical, and evidence is only as good as the interpretation thereof. Observational evidence can never "prove" a theory, only support or destroy a theory.
So far, no one has offered evidence that NOW is not the same instant everywhere, and noone has offered evidence to show that rod ends are not in the same instant of time. This does not seem to me to be the talk of a crank. In fact, anyone who disagrees with these two statement is necessarily a crank.
Edited by marcospolo, 12 February 2019 - 05:17 PM.