ughaibu Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 I know nothing about either maths or physics, so before attempting to understand the arguements on the site linked to, I'd appreciate opinions as to whether or not it makes any valid points. http://hometown.aol.com/crebigsol/awards.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 copyright since '96 and still no-one has prooved them wrong.. I would say no-one is bothering because there is a flaw, but its over my head.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Okay, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 The maths is beyond me, but I have two observations: 1. The emotional language in the site is a diagnostic feature of pseudoscience.2. An acronym of the site's copyright holder is Re my con: a big loser Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 i just thought that was a silly thing to say.. If there is a flaw and you point it out you get money.. I dont know :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 I agree that the sensationalism of the presentation is suspicious. Maybe a concerted effort by our resident physicists can land the 50K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 i just thought that was a silly thing to say.. If there is a flaw and you point it out you get money.. I dont know :)If you have played poker you will be the familiar with the art of bluffing.....when you don't even have a pair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erasmus00 Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 This site has been around for a few years, and its author is far from serious about his prize offer. Much like Kent Hovind's evolution challenge, there is no real way to win the money. Suffice to say, the page is just bad algebra dressed up as physics. -Will Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 26, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 Erasmus00: Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay-qu Posted March 26, 2006 Report Share Posted March 26, 2006 yeah I play a bit of poker - I got a 500 chip set for my b'day :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted March 27, 2006 Report Share Posted March 27, 2006 He's one of many that think these things are wrong because they don't understand them. I could do with the dough but I somehow don't think it's worth the trouble to go for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Thanks. Does this mean that his maths is clearly incorrect or does it look suspect but for no obvious reason? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Which maths? He simply has no grasp of what he presumes to criticize. It would therefore be pointless to expect him to admit to a proof against him, and fork out the dough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 I see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigD Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 Thanks. Does this mean that his maths is clearly incorrect or does it look suspect but for no obvious reason?The terms used in http://hometown.aol.com/crebigsol/section1A.html are poorly explained. Even without explanation, it appears to me that the author (Rebigsol) uses the term x in the first equation in “Eq. set A” as a constant for initial position relative to a stationary observer, and the position of a point moving at the speed of light © in the preceeding text and the 3rd equation. If so, “Eq. A-1”, though algebraically correct, is nonsensical. In physical terms, the author appears to be attempting to find inconsistency in the predictions of Special Relativity in a system of 2 inertial frames with a relative velocity of c. In common metaphoric terms, he is asking what an observer would see of people moving around on a train moving at the speed of light. In particle physics terms, this is equivalent to asserting that particles moving at c, which can only be bosons, interact according to a statistic such as the Pauli exclusion principle. In mathematical terms, he is measuring infinitesimals ((1-v^2)^.5 as v approaches 1). In either kind terms, he is basing his arguments against the mathematical consistency of Special Relativity on an occurrence that is theoretically impossible. Although I believe his paper can be convincingly refuted, I have not intention of challenging the author, for fear of entering into a weird and disturbing dialog. I mistrust that he is prepared to have judged and awarded the cash prize he cites in legally legitimate manner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ughaibu Posted March 28, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 CraigD: Thanks, a nice critique. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted March 28, 2006 Report Share Posted March 28, 2006 In particle physics terms, this is equivalent to asserting that particles moving at c, which can only be bosons, interact according to a statistic such as the Pauli exclusion principle.To move at c they must be massless, they don't need to be bosons. Alright, enough nitpicking.... :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.