What H.A. Lorentz had to say about Einstein


Recommended Posts

You are bothered by the so-called Twin Paradox, which is not a paradox at all.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox

The article should explain the matter clearly to you.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Doesn't answer my question.

I'm asking a simple question here. I didn't say there was a paradox, I didn't say that something is contradictory, I said it was seemingly causeless. Let me give you an example. If someone asks why the sun is hot, then I can easily refer to the cause: hydrogen fusion caused by gravity. And if these aren't clear I can expand further. Very simple.

I'm asking you an equally simple question. I'm asking what causes the "time" to slow down. I am not disagreeing with it, I'm not saying it's paradoxical, I'm simply asking why it happens, and I expect the "why" to refer to something physical, not a mathematical abstraction.

Shayne

A physical explanation is what Lorentz ether theory gives - not Special Relativity - though they share the same math.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A physical explanation is what Lorentz ether theory gives - not Special Relativity - though they share the same math.

Yes, I'm aware of Lorentz's idea and think he was on the right track. It's a shame he let himself be dissuaded from his approach.

But what I don't understand his how Bob can be as obtuse as he is.

Shayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

A physical explanation is what Lorentz ether theory gives - not Special Relativity - though they share the same math.

Yes, I'm aware of Lorentz's idea and think he was on the right track. It's a shame he let himself be dissuaded from his approach.

But what I don't understand his how Bob can be as obtuse as he is.

Shayne

What happened to Lorentz also happened to de Broglie and J. J. Thomson when they did not come up with immediate sweeping solutions to difficult problems they allowed themselves to be talked out of or pushed out of the research they were doing by the consensus mob.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A physical explanation is what Lorentz ether theory gives - not Special Relativity - though they share the same math.

Yes, I'm aware of Lorentz's idea and think he was on the right track. It's a shame he let himself be dissuaded from his approach.

But what I don't understand his how Bob can be as obtuse as he is.

Shayne

What happened to Lorentz also happened to de Broglie and J. J. Thomson when they did not come up with immediate sweeping solutions to difficult problems they allowed themselves to be talked out of or pushed out of the research they were doing by the consensus mob.

Indeed.

So what are your ideas on this? Have you written them down? How would you answer my question? Would you refer to Lorentz, or do you have further thoughts?

Shayne

Link to post
Share on other sites

A physical explanation is what Lorentz ether theory gives - not Special Relativity - though they share the same math.

Yes, I'm aware of Lorentz's idea and think he was on the right track. It's a shame he let himself be dissuaded from his approach.

But what I don't understand his how Bob can be as obtuse as he is.

Shayne

What happened to Lorentz also happened to de Broglie and J. J. Thomson when they did not come up with immediate sweeping solutions to difficult problems they allowed themselves to be talked out of or pushed out of the research they were doing by the consensus mob.

Indeed.

So what are your ideas on this? Have you written them down? How would you answer my question? Would you refer to Lorentz, or do you have further thoughts?

Shayne

The Lorentz answer is the correct answer to your question. When I took Special Relativity both approaches were taught which is not generally the case. My further thoughts mostly include my model of the aether which I explain in some detail in my book about it. If you like a free copy email me at dennislmay@yahoo.com with your address. I sent out one copy to an Objectivist Living member today. The book is the 2nd edition which doesn't include updated work for the last 3 years - hard to tell when I will finish the 3rd edition but the 2nd edition get you most of the flavor. The book is more or less a set of outlines of the theory. A complete work would be a tome requiring me to do nothing else for several years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now