[Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 3, Issue 19

[cj at mb-soft.com]

I fully concur with you gentlemen that many of the "mainstream" modern Physicists use horrible assumptions and speculations in dreaming up many of the ideas which all other mainstream physicists then immediately accept. 




However, I see a variation of that same problem in the discussions that you gentlemen try to discuss in this Forum. As a Theoretical Physicist, I find humor in some of your arguments. A recent example is your fascination with "aether". IF you are going to refer to historical information, please make an effort to get your facts straight. It is darkly hilarious that you discuss incremental differences, and errors, in the orbital parameters of the planets, where you then attempt to justify the "aether" regarding those math issues. PLEASE check your history regarding such things. Kepler was a smart guy, but he lived a hundred years (five generations) before the even smarter Isaac Newton. Kepler very reasonably assumed that the mass of the Sun established the orbital parameters of the planets, and it was very impressive that he determined that the Sun is at one of the foci of each planet's elliptical orbits.




It was a hundred years later that Newton realized that BOTH masses orbit each other in such ellipses, where he corrected Kepler's earlier math imprecision.




So your arguments today about trying to sleuth out some aether explanation for that difference are in error. It was merely the way science advances through history. 




I note that none of you seem to refer to another advance that Newton made, due to his "Fluxions" (which we call Calculus). Even the "mainstream physics community" have not gotten past Kepler here. Kepler's ideas that everything in the Solar System are entirely dependent on the Sun's mass, is STILL assumed to apply to the Milky Way Galaxy, and so people argue today that the Spiral Arms fail to comply with Kepler's Laws in having any chance of being stable. The mainstream physics community should also check their historical records, to see that Newton had also resolved that a hundred years after Kepler, by stating that Calculus must be used regarding the DISTRIBUTED MASS of any entity like the Galaxy, where Kepler's assumption of a POINT MASS of the Sun was relatively accurate for the Solar System.




It is really critically important to be extremely careful in checking all facts and logic, if worthwhile physics might result. 




A few weeks ago, I had noticed a similar error of such sloppiness in your discussions about Michelson-Morley and Lorentz and Fitzgerald and Maxwell (a genration before the others, around 1860). As a Physics student at the University of Chicago, we spent months in very carefully examining and analyzing all of the thoughts of those brilliant men (and Faraday even earlier). Comments by some of you gentlemen seem to have neglected a lot of that important fact-checking, where you express "personal opinions" which were often just speculations. Due to such logical errors, it seemed obvious to me that your grasp of both Special Relativity and General Relativity, cannot really become solid.




If you really want to advance the field of Physics, or even better, clean up some of the areas of the speculations of the "mainstream physics community", you really should rigidly check your facts and logic before building your own conjectures. 




Carl Johnson



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161227/d490dcc0/attachment.html>