[Physics] Arguments for or against the variable time (of Relativity)

[Doug Marett]

Hi Oliver,

    If you go to more website I wrote a paper on this, where I take actual
quotes of what Einstein predicts (I have 5 examples), and then I compare
them to the actual results of the Hafele Keating experiment. See:
http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Hafele/HafeleKeating.html
Einstein gets them all wrong.
   The problem is that the Sagnac effect is actually "anti-relativistic"
because it implies that the speed of light is constant only in the
non-rotating frame of the "fixed stars", a.k.a. absolute space. I have some
experience with this because I build Sagnac interferometers for a living:
http://skyhunt.net/

It also implies that there is an absolute time, see:
http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/SagnacRel/SagnacandRel.html

And by the way, I did climb that mountain, and there is a picture of me
checking the time at the end of this article, so I have at least walked the
walk on my thought experiment : )

Doug




On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:59 PM, O. Serret <o.serret at free.fr> wrote:

> Dear Doug,
>
> I do agree that points 1) 2) and 4) don’t seem logical, but these are not
> experimental results.
>
> More concrete is Hafele and Keating experiment.Why do you say it
> contradicts Einstein's predictions ?
>
> Because according to Wiki (*), it would confirm them ...
>
> Thank you for your explanation, and best regards
> Olivier
>
> * : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20161022/0280de5b/attachment.html>