Abstract (MT)
In the inertial systems, there
is no hype sense. They are either identical in Galilei or are various in Einstein.
Another interpretation is off. If
the method of scientific comparison
(intuitively applied by Einstein) was accessible for Galilei, he would
never introduced (invented)
the notorious Principle of relativity. If the
logic "or identity, or difference" not
escaped of Einstein, he would never misled the science with
its ludicrous new logic "and identity, and difference".
Keywords: inertial
systems, identity, difference
INTRODUCTION
I find it suitably to put an accent on a comment to my
article curious as typecasting. The
same reflects the general misunderstanding of the fact that Einstein factual
refutes the thesis of Galilei for
absolute identity of relatively moving
inertial systems. On this topic I have not one or two
submissions, but will be only beneficial for Cognition to take the
occasion for an even big someone stroke.
EXPOSITION
1. For the poisoning with relativism
Here
is a part of the comment
(copy-paste): Anonymous Jan 30, 2012 / 20:42
"Even Galilei
has formulated
that the rectilinear and uniform movement and peace are indistinguishable and via get no physical an experience could not to demonstrate whether a body is at peace or moving rectilinearly and uniformly. With this postulate he has formulated the relativity of the movement, conclusion of which is that we can with a full right to accept that no body moves but everything around it."
that the rectilinear and uniform movement and peace are indistinguishable and via get no physical an experience could not to demonstrate whether a body is at peace or moving rectilinearly and uniformly. With this postulate he has formulated the relativity of the movement, conclusion of which is that we can with a full right to accept that no body moves but everything around it."
And here's a part of my response: alniko February
1, 2012 / 09:18
"You describe the contemporary understanding. I strive to show how unnaturally have come to it. A basic principle in nature is the principle of opposites… The movement is not simply kinematics. In the real moving system run physical processes, while in the other, mirrored moving, are not."
"You describe the contemporary understanding. I strive to show how unnaturally have come to it. A basic principle in nature is the principle of opposites… The movement is not simply kinematics. In the real moving system run physical processes, while in the other, mirrored moving, are not."
Without
going into details, it seems no
one sees the essence of the relative defect. The sticking to the letter academic body
with disregard and carelessness extinguish every impulse for the straightening of problematic regulations, continuing to infuse into
young minds the reproduced
toxins of relativism. The poisoning is ubiquitous.
The state of common sense has undergone in to your opposite equivalent. The
antidote for awakening and emergence of the
consciousness so far turns out weak
and ineffective. But there is no force
that is able to stop the process
of its "realization", of
its "coming to itself"
even more to on the
background of the hesitation and fatigue from the
relative oddities. Here I will directly inject the
subsequent dose normal logic and sober look at
the circumstances.
2. The position of Galilei: the inertial systems
are absolutely identical,
respectively,
their movement is absolutely
relative
It
would be good but is also the
high time the physical
and the philosophical community to think seriously how far scientifically justified is unreservedly to
accept the viewpoint of Galilei, after knows that he takes its conclusions
from the insignificantly narrow segment of the mechanical
movements.
Naturally,
the great scientist has researched
the phenomenon of "inertial systems"
station with all due for its time
accuracy of the treatments. Explicitly emphasize the
explanation "station with all due accuracy for its time" because by then us
divide centuries accumulated new knowledge
and experience.
Today every waking mind is
able to see through and realized that the formula "peace=movement"
from those distant years, in fact is a result of, one kind, comparing of
eye...from a judgment in sense. As well as one person to look research
efforts of Galilei, they do not represent nothing more than a too low level of
Cognition.
More
specifically, in the range
of the classical speeds
Galilei not observes
(not captures
sensory) no difference between the state of peace,
and that of even and a rectilinear
motion. On this basis, announces
the two states, respectively, the two systems,
their bearers for absolutely identical
(indistinguishable) and "legalizes" this own observation,
ergo, this own perception,
introducing the notorious Principle
of relativity.
Let again boldly underline that he
takes into account solely the field of the tangible speeds. Therefore, it is more than
surprising that his thesis (for indistinguishability of peace and the movement) with obviously limited
perimeter of action be taken a priori for
universal truth as
something intelligible of itself,
which does not need a whatever it is
quarantine awaiting in the column "assumptions and hypotheses."
Anyway,
the moving relative to one another
inertial systems like
forever are marked with the stamp
of the identity. However,
the made remarks give
to understand that whether it is really so, in fact remains in question...require us to be very careful and
responsible. Ultimately, we are not talking about
some a secondary dependence,
say, like the laws of Archimedes and for
the states "peace" and "movement" of the matter, which form the basis of the Universe. We must have awareness that ruling on a fundamental law of nature, forming or
deforming our worldview.
Pay
attention to the fact that, after
the opinion of Galileoi, the mind,
apparently unsatisfied, refused to
accept the task of closed,
continuing to look for a solution, which to be in force for the movement in throughout the range of
speeds.
3. The position
of Einstein: the
inertial systems differ,
but this difference is fully
reversible,
which makes them identical (the inertial systems differ, but
are absolutely identical??),
respectively, their movement is absolutely
relative
In a result appears the Special
theory of relativity – an expression of incredibly growing and modernized cognitive abilities of the consciousness. The same approaches to relatively moving inertial systems
(one symbolizing the
peace and the other the movement)
completely objectively in the strictly
scientific rules of comparison (for which Galilei has
no idea), thereby achieving a
peak accuracy of the study.
But its author
does not fully understand the essence of what he does. He has no the knowledge
that realizes the necessary for this case perfect comparative procedure.
Accordingly, no respecter of results as opposed to those of its own illustrious
predecessor. And they are precisely ones.
That is, Einstein shows that the
inertial systems are absolutely identical only when they are at rest relative
to one another. The emergence even on the negligible relative
velocity v
between them leads to a difference in their parameters...makes
them different. Only the differences
become possible for reporting barely at speeds of very
high order. That
is why Galilei fails to see them and puts a sign of equality between
systems. Galilei involuntarily is made a mistake. His conclusions are wholly wrong.
Einstein,
however, after the significant disclosure of the discrepancy between the systems starts to return things back in the mental plane of Galilei. He not perceives that the same is already compromised,
is crashed, that the
systems really are opposite.
But
how to make two differing systems to look identical?
How to equated two opposing natures. Can he after having de facto "the one is distinct from the other" in some lawful
logical, physical, mathematical way to achieve a result,
"the one is identical
of the other?" I.e.,
is there a lawful possibility the concept "the other" somehow to lose sense
and to obtain one thing identically only on themselves (except by terminating the relative motion, in this case)?
Today,
to each of us must be abundantly clear that, except through jugglery no other way of
achieving such reincarnation. And the making of tricks,
we know means illusion, machination, ultimately, fraud, but hidden behind a
some applied sleight
(of course,
all this is not maliciously, and presented as an art – a demonstration of
skills).
Einstein, naturally, is not an illusionist, and is fraught with an awareness of scientifically movement to the truth. But, disoriented, he factual
proceeded to manipulation of the results obtained. So seemingly succeeds to obliterate the coming to light asymmetry between the systems. Illegal
actions however cannot stay
without consequences. This
"a profitable" move
has been achieved at the cost of conversion of the objective physics in a startling psycho-forum.
The scientific thought turns out firmly ensnared in the delusion of Galilei – "the inertial systems are absolutely indistinguishable...the peace and the movement are absolutely relative". But quite is not accidental that after the work of Einstein, the mind still not considers the problem in definitively resolved and continues frantically to seek the truth.
The scientific thought turns out firmly ensnared in the delusion of Galilei – "the inertial systems are absolutely indistinguishable...the peace and the movement are absolutely relative". But quite is not accidental that after the work of Einstein, the mind still not considers the problem in definitively resolved and continues frantically to seek the truth.
4. The decision of
each comparison is one – identity or difference
The
contemporary scientists cannot
but are completely convinced that
the Great Italian conducts their experimental and theoretical
activities completely unaware in
order essential characteristics of the space, time, light, etc. Ultimately, that he did not know
anything about the method of scientifically comparing of the systems and not at all apply it. Can not but are completely convinced that he handles almost entirely speculative with notions
of "peace" and "movement",
that not at all disposal the necessary and sufficient grounds
for their identity.
In
a similar way things stand and
at Einstein. Our time must realize that he is moving forward in the right direction only thanks to his
brilliant intuition. While,
in practice, has no clear idea that accomplishes theoretical realization of an ordinary, banal comparison of the
systems. Therefore violates respectively, ignores a single usually banal decision of
the comparison – that the systems are either identical or different. Another
possibility does not exist – nor as any third nor as any intermediate "a
part of the two" nor as any "both at once" (and to be identical in their difference – conceptually intricate philosophical word combination allegedly expressing deep insight into the dialectic – in fact is pure philosophical violence over reason, nonsense which physically
simply no way to realize...nor as mathematical)
Again
and again I repeat the elementary
truth which at last needs to unblock the
relevant brain centers. Galilei, the founder of
modern science simply has sown a fallacy.
And I will not get weary
it become bare at every opportunity.
Actually, it is quite naked with
nothing to undressing...just that the scientists look to it
through his "lenses with a cataract of ignorance objectively"
concealing its outlines under a veil of ethereal cobweb. Entangling in the invisible threads, Einstein also starts
in wrong the
given direction of thinking, giving the case a mystical-comic
colors.
And so, in the inertial systems there is no hype sense.
They are either identical in Galilei or are various in Einstein.
Another interpretation is off.
CONCLUTION
In this connection, I could express the
following conditional
assumptions:
– If the method of scientific
comparison (intuitively applied by Einstein) was accessible for Galilei, he would never introduced
(invented) the notorious Principle of relativity.
– If the logic "or identity,
or difference" not escaped of
Einstein, he would never
misled the science with its ludicrous new
logic "both identity,
and difference" (would never replaced the normal logic "or, or"
with the abnormal "and, and").
And already not at all as a guess:
– If the physicists on time
was decided the experience of Michelson-Morley from A to Z, they would see that
it's not all the same whether the Earth moves relative to the Ether or the Ether moves
relative to the Earth. [1]
But such smooth rights of ascent of Cognition is impossible
to happen...is not in the laws of development.
The objective cognitive line passes precisely
through the mistakes
made. So that Galilei
and Einstein appear link in the chain, without which can not.
Barely post factum
comes the rationalization of the maxim that there is no way
two different to unify. There is no way to depersonalize their opposite. The same is a question of physical
differences. In the real moving system run reversible
kinetic-potential processes, subordinate to speed...only in it. [2]
To explain more and more all this seems
to me a funny...and stupidly.
But is necessary...the antidote
should not stop.
Reference
[1] Николов А. – Извеждане трансформациите на Лоренц
от експеримента на Майкълсън- Морли
(Nikolov A. – Working out
of the Lorentz transformations from the Michelson-Morley experiment)
[2] Николов
А. – За релативните ефекти
върху дължината и времето (некоректната физика на Специалната теория)
(Nikolov A. – For the relative effects on length and time (incorrect physics of the Special theory)
_______________________________________________________________________
Alexandar Nikolov © 2010-2013 All rights reserved (COPYRIGHT © 2010-2013)
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар