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

[Doug Marett]

Hi Oliver,

    Well, Einstein never spoke about the Sagnac effect, but it certainly
does contradict Einstein's special theory of relativity, as I have pointed
out in the article, if you take direct quotes from Einstein's SR papers and
apply them to the observations, they are in direct contradiction. Most
people resort to General Relativity to try to explain the Sagnac effect,
but as I mention in the paper, many of the earlier writers on the subject
felt that general relativity did not add anything to the explanation of the
effect. There was of course the big dispute between the Frenchmen Dufour
and Prunier against Langevin the relativist, with regard to whether
relativity could properly explain the results of various Sagnac effect
experiments - there is my English translation of the Dufour Prunier paper
here:
http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/pdf/Dufour_and_Prunier-On_the_Fringe_Movement_Registered_on_a_Platform_in_Uniform_Motion_%281942%29.pdf
but if you read French than you would be better off with the original
French version. It seems that Langevin lost this argument, but in spite of
this, arguments similar to Langevin's have continued to dominate in the
relativistic explanation of the effect. The problem is that it doesn't
count if you can demonstrate that the speed of light is C for a stationary
observer of a rotating disk, because this becomes a problem of "stationary
with respect to what"? Ultimately, as I pointed out in the last paper I
sent you, the solution is "stationary with respect to absolute space", a
premise that should be fatal to relativity since it implies that there is a
preferred frame of reference for light. Amazingly, nobody seems to notice
this because they probably never read Hafele and Keating's original paper
and their reference to Builder's theory and absolute motions and
velocities, that was incorporated to explain the result.

Doug

On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 4:45 PM, O. Serret <o.serret at free.fr> wrote:

> Hi Doug,
>
> Your paper is very interesting, and Sagnac effect explanation too. And I
> do agree we can find other explanations of Hafele and Keating results, for
> example with aether as you write it.
>
> But from the point of view of a Relativity supporter, does Hafele and
> Keating experiment contradicts Einstein’s theory ?  Is there any
> contradiction in this theory ? or a lack of precision in this experiment ?
>
> Thank you for your answer
> Olivier
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161022/1ce18cfd/attachment.html>