89
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 208:
Line 208: + + +
Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 00:08, December 24, 2012
, 00:08, December 24, 2012#47. #48 will have to wait.
#:A quick Google search will show that there is no "concerted effort to suppress knowledge about the phenomenon". Tom van Flandern (no darling of those who accept relativity; he has been cited at Conservapedia in the "Lack of evidence for Relativity" section) explains the phenomenon in his 2003 paper [http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v67/i2/e022002 Allais gravity and pendulum effects during solar eclipses explained]: "Here we show that an unusual phenomenon that occurs only during solar eclipses, rapid air mass movement for the bulk of the atmosphere above normal cloud levels, appears to be a sufficient explanation for both the magnitude and behavior of the anomaly previously reported in these pages."
#:A quick Google search will show that there is no "concerted effort to suppress knowledge about the phenomenon". Tom van Flandern (no darling of those who accept relativity; he has been cited at Conservapedia in the "Lack of evidence for Relativity" section) explains the phenomenon in his 2003 paper [http://prd.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v67/i2/e022002 Allais gravity and pendulum effects during solar eclipses explained]: "Here we show that an unusual phenomenon that occurs only during solar eclipses, rapid air mass movement for the bulk of the atmosphere above normal cloud levels, appears to be a sufficient explanation for both the magnitude and behavior of the anomaly previously reported in these pages."
#:The fact that "attempts to duplicate the result have been reported as failures" is certainly consistent with an effort to suppress knowledge, but it's also consistent with the effect not existing.
#:The fact that "attempts to duplicate the result have been reported as failures" is certainly consistent with an effort to suppress knowledge, but it's also consistent with the effect not existing.
#''Scientists at the Collider Detector at Fermilab collided protons and anti-protons ....''
#:Actually, the energy released in a collision should equal the initial kinetic energy of the colliding particles plus their rest mass energy, ''minus the rest mass energy of the resultant particles''. There is no suggestion that this wasn't the case in the cited experiment.
#:The title of the cited article is "Has new physics been found at the ageing Tevatron?" It is about the discovery of more muons than predicted, as well as some muons that appear to have originated from outside of the "pipe" area of the Tevatron. There was no suggestion at all that relativity was violated. The article was simply about a new discovery. Relativity never made the claim that no new physics would ever again be discovered.
== References ==
== References ==