[Physics] Clock time vs. common sense time

[Doug Marett]

Hi Ilja,

   I took a look at some of your papers on arxiv.org. Well done. I think
mathematical papers can have power. But a major shift to a Lorentzian ether
in the mindset of the scientific community won't be able to occur without
some groundbreaking experimental advancements, like an "experimentum
crucis". As you may know (or not) my approach has been mostly experimental.
And I believe at this point that a major experimental breakthrough is
likely to come from the dissident community, or perhaps the corporate
community, because these are the communities that are not actively
suppressing alternative views.
So I am curious about your experience with arxiv.org, since you seem to be
able to get your message out there, whereas many of the rest of us have
been blocked. I attempted to publish on arxiv.org last year with a test
paper that was, in my opinion, pretty safe, just an educational /
experimental paper on the fiber optic gyroscope. Despite being sponsored by
another arxiv.org author, the paper was rejected twice (including after
modifications) without anything more than a computer generated response. So
I just ended up posting it to Vixra. http://vixra.org/pdf/1506.0002v1.pdf
Have you encountered any of these problems when trying to get your work
published? It is my understanding that authors that got onto arxiv.org back
before 2008(?) have been safer from this kind of trouble.

Doug


On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 5:13 AM, Ilja Schmelzer <
ilja.schmelzer at googlemail.com> wrote:

> 2016-10-27 1:34 GMT+02:00, Doug Marett <dm88dm at gmail.com>:
> > I am happy to hear that you are a Presentist, but then, are you not in
> > direct opposition to views of relativists?
>
> Of course I oppose relativism.  I'm an ether theoretician.
>
> But I object against invalid criticism of relativity.  So, special
> relativity is from a physical point of view simply an unfortunate
> spacetime interpretation of the Lorentz-Einstein theory, which has
> also a reasonable, presentist interpretation, the Lorentz ether.
>
> So, objections against relativity which talk about "Einstien's logical
> errors" and so on are simply nonsensical and have to be rejected.
> Similarly, claims that there is no time dilation are nonsense.  One
> has to understand that "time dilation" is about clock time, not true
> time, and that true time is not measurable with clocks.  And one has
> to develop ether theories, which are in agreement with all the
> observations of modern physics - as for gravity, as for particle
> physics, as for cosmology - even if they follow a different
> (non-relativistic, presentist) interpretation.  We can discuss this on
> http://ilja-schmelzer.de/forum/ too.
>
> As a consequence, my ether theory, which is a generalization of the
> Lorentz ether, is very close in its mathematics to GR.  And it is
> published in a peer-reviewed mainstream journal. It is so close to GR,
> that the Einstein Equivalence Principle holds exactly (even if not in
> its Strong variant), and that the Einstein Equations of GR appear in a
> natural limit of my theory.
> See http://ilja-schmelzer.de/gravity/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20161027/8e6efb6e/attachment.html>