Featured Relativity: A Theory in Crisis

Why was this post given spotlight?

Did you ever bother to read this incredibly stupid paper presented at the insane section of some unknown and unimportant conference?

Reminds me of the episode from South Park - ICenti-Ipad. "BUT CAN IT READ!?"

Let's go through it.

If you do not understand, this experiment was never done. The Chinese physicist proposed an experiment that wasn't and I'm pretty sure will never be done. It is that bad of a proposal.

Let me reiterate this. No experiment has been done. No empirical evidence has been found.

This Ruyong Wang seems to have made a cottage industry of this dog doo and from what I can tell has not succeed in either getting someone else to do his experiments or succeeded in setting up his experiments himself. He is mindlessly plowing forward into a fictional area and no one native to this continent is following him.

Wang says a lot of silly stuff.

"Some deductions in special relativity, like the relation between mass and speed, have strong experimental support." - There is no relation between mass and speed. This is a common mistake that has to be demonstrated to Undergraduate Physics majors because they were taught this by a poor U.S. HS science teacher who was forced to teach a subject they knew nothing about. And I guess it's being taught in China somewhere - I'm hoping not Taiwan.

"If motion really is purely relative, then speed is also purely relative, and therefore, mass must be purely relative." - This insanity is exactly why there is no relation between mass and speed. This also shows that the author, despite his position, doesn't understand basic undergraduate physics. Although understood by those who needed to know like the people who built the atomic bombs, the notation used in the equations at the beginning of the 20th century was confusing to those who didn't come from the experimental background. This is why Einstein suggested a notation change in 1948.

Regardless, could you people please read the articles before you blindly put your faith in them.

 

Marty, meet Aaron.

Aaron is physics challenged.

There are many more where that one came from.

A few posts upstream I facetiously posted my "How does he do that? Does he [the observer] have eyes on the back of his head?" to see what Aaron would say.

 

Ok, I apologize for my tenor. I get frustrated having to teach this constantly sometimes.

 

If you want to remain willfully ignorant and refuse to read the actual article and not the abstract, there is nothing I can do. I can’t force you to read.

I’ll just have to put you on ignore.

 

Yes, and as we know, all scientists are objective, even-handed, intelligent people. Truth seekers without agendas. Just look at the climatologists and evolutionists.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

You are not quoting scientists. You are quoting a mentally deranged insane person who has a limited grasp of the English language.

Have you looked to see if the guy even graduated high school?

Willfully ignorant.

 

I'm not going to dox myself.

You have no clue what a Physics professional journal is or what they are all about. You still haven't bothered to read the article. You have no idea who Ruyong Wang is and you haven't made an infantile attempt to find out.

How many articles have you read written by Ruyong Wang - Zero.

The last thing I would want is Ruyong Wang's publishing record. Nor would I want either of his patents he shares with some less than stellar engineers.

And now you're just chasing Red Herrings.

George Carlin Quote: “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.”

Bye

 

How many does he need?

 

You said:

I don't know if Marty is published or not. Supposing he is...how many articles must he have published to satisfy you?