Path: ...!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Thomas Heger Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math Subject: Re: Getting there at last... Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2024 09:54:52 +0200 Lines: 76 Message-ID: References: <1HWE6H1jV8YTvxfaaL7fnCCcpe8@jntp> <9YCpfbWayDDTVrmI9Yye1LKiThs@jntp> <660BAEAC.433D@ix.netcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net L94bdwv2NMmyi/qr9T07jQHZ9aXewpGLj7O6VCPT2rhkGIAdyr Cancel-Lock: sha1:M2t59pdb6/nCCftvZSD3MAcSd1Y= sha256:PZe6bhGRzYlnO0O+2FEnNd8suRkNANULGklSZyRwKSg= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 In-Reply-To: Bytes: 3474 Am 04.04.2024 um 04:18 schrieb Arindam Banerjee: > Le 03/04/2024 à 16:58, Thomas Heger a écrit : >> Am 02.04.2024 um 09:07 schrieb The Starmaker: >>> Thomas Heger wrote: >>>> >>>> Am 30.03.2024 um 11:38 schrieb Arindam Banerjee: >>>>> Le 30/03/2024 à 18:48, Thomas Heger a écrit : >>>>>> Am 28.03.2024 um 08:09 schrieb Arindam Banerjee: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Maybe you like my 'book' >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>>> .... > It is some 100 times better than the one used before. Much less power > consumption, far more force on the bullet which could be a guided > missile at hypersonic speeds. > > As for my gun, check out > https://groups.google.com/g/sci.physics/c/VtFeGAkIABg/m/CLPzLRElAwAJ > Follow the link to the 2-sec video. > >>> >>> and trying to connect QM and GR is...apples and oranges. > > Both are nonsense to me. > When inertia is busted, entropy and relativity and quantum are also busted. > Aether is back, filling the infinite universe. > > I hope you realise that one day. I have actually written a longish critique of 'On the electrodynamics of moving bodies' (here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RkhX-B5u7X4ga0QH-C53RddjQGctZVdo/view ) and know what you mean. But I think, that relativity is not entirely wrong. It is a principle, which is VERY counterintuitive and not discussed very often: we have a forward and a backwards time, which both occur and are both real. Which time is forward, that is debatable, hence both are and the other one is in relative motion 'backwards'. About QM I had to criticise a few points, too. That was mainly the particle concept itself. Particles are assumed to be lasting entities, created shortly after the big bang. But I found a counter-example: Growing Earth. Since the Earth is in fact growing, the idea of lasting particles cannot be true. So, in a way, I had to strike a few assumptions, but maintain the idea itself (of GR and QM). It's not my business anyhow, since what I tried to do, that is finding the connection between GR and QM and didn't attempt to justify these branches of physics. TH >