[Physics] Compatibility with and/or the properties of the Standard Model (SM)

[Tom Hollings]

Arend, you said "Yep, the guy who actually designed the GPS system developed his own
> variant of a Lorentzian aether, without which he could not get it to work"
I am not sure about the Lorentzian ether, but he used Lorentz's relativity, not Einstein's relativity. The two look superficially the same, as they use the same formulas, but are vastly different. For instance, Lorentz assumes a preferred reference frame, whereas Einstein says all reference frames are equal. That simple difference, makes the two theories completely different.
I will look up your references.
Tom.



> On 29 April 2020 at 11:55 Arend Lammertink <lamare at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:31 AM Tom Hollings <carmam at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Mike, most people on this forum will not get past peer review, for the simple reason that we go against mainstream "groupthink". We do not believe most of the mainstream theories which are out there. My speciality is Einstein's SRT, followed by GRT, and although I do not know as much about GRT as I do SRT, I know enough to get by. In any case, as GRT is built on SRT, if SRT fails, so does GRT. One of the main predictions of SRT is that no material body (and no information either) can travel faster than light.
> 
> > See my web page :- http://problemswithrelativity.com/#lorentz  look at the fourth paragraph if you want to skip the intro, and tell me where my error is.
> 
> "When Hendrik A. Lorentz devised his transformation formulae in 1890
> he thought that they applied only to electrically charged bodies, but
> Einstein incorporated them into his special theory of relativity
> assuming that they applied to all bodies."
> 
> This is interesting, see my answer in the thread "Do longitudinal FTL
> "Tesla" waves exist and, if yes, how should they be modelled?"
> 
> The very reason for the existence of the Lorentz transform is because
> Maxwell forced the irrotational half of the Helmholtz decomposition,
> the electric field [E], to have a curl, a rotation. This is why no
> propagation speed for the electric field follows from Maxwell and in
> order to fix that, Lorentz introduced a "retardation effect", which
> forced a propagation speed, c, upon the propagation of the electric
> field. However, the electric field is a longitudinal wave and not a
> transverse wave and therefore propagates considerably faster than the
> Herzian wave, the only wave predicted by Maxwell.
> 
> 
> > Proponents of GRT say that the Global Positioning System would not work without GRT & SRT, but this is plain wrong, as any in depth investigation will show.
> 
> Yep, the guy who actually designed the GPS system developed his own
> variant of a Lorentzian aether, without which he could not get it to
> work:
> 
> http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Material/Ronald_Hatch/Hatch-Clock_Behavior_and_theSearch_for_an_Underlying_Mechanism_for_Relativistic_Phenomena_2002.pdf
> 
> Lots of information in there, and there's also this presentation
> wherein he shines some light on relativity and GPS:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOQweA_J4S4
> 
> Very interesting video, he touches upon many inconsistensies found in
> relativists' arguments and papers. Well worth your time watching, if
> you're interested in relativity.
> 
> > We are told also that a Sagnac correction is built into the system, but why should that be? The Sagnac correction is for signals which go round a loop and back to the starting point, this plainly does not apply to the GPS, as all signals travel only one way - from the satellites to the receivers.
> 
> The root of all of the probems are Maxwell's equations, as I've argued
> extensively already.
> 
> Greetz,
> 
> Arend.