Simultaneity Cannot Possibly be Relative to Motion - Revision history

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:55:23Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 1 January 2017
Line 13:		Line 13:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simultaneity possibly relative motion]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simultaneity possibly relative motion]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|simultaneity possibly relative motion]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:03:57Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, 1 January 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Infobox paper		{{Infobox paper
	\| title = Simultaneity Cannot Possibly be Relative to Motion		\| title = Simultaneity Cannot Possibly be Relative to Motion
	\| author = [[John E. Chappell]]		\| author = [[John E Chappell]]
	\| keywords = [[Simultaneity]], [[Relativity]], [[Motion]]		\| keywords = [[Simultaneity]], [[Relativity]], [[Motion]]
	\| published = 1999		\| published = 1999
Line 9:		Line 9:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	A slightly modified version of the 1962 critique by philosopher Melbourne Evans (Emeritus, Univ. of New Mexico) shows that (I) in the famous moving train thought experiment he used to introduce his spatial theory of relativity, Einstein reached his result of relative simultaneity only by contradicting himself within the same chain of reasoning; and furthermore that (2) avoiding such a contradiction will lead inevitably to <u>absolute</u> simultaneity, whatever velocity is attributed to light. As shown in a 1968 book by Rosser, another kind of attempt to validate relative simultaneity, a mathematical "proof' based on the Lorentz transformations, rests entirely on an invalid shift in meaning of certain mathematical symbols - which at first designate <u>lengths</u>. and then surreptitiously are reassigned to designate <u>points</u>.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		A slightly modified version of the 1962 critique by philosopher Melbourne Evans (Emeritus, Univ. of New Mexico) shows that (I) in the famous moving train thought experiment he used to introduce his spatial theory of relativity, Einstein reached his result of relative simultaneity only by contradicting himself within the same chain of reasoning; and furthermore that (2) avoiding such a contradiction will lead inevitably to <u>absolute</u> simultaneity, whatever velocity is attributed to light. As shown in a 1968 book by Rosser, another kind of attempt to validate relative simultaneity, a mathematical "proof' based on the Lorentz transformations, rests entirely on an invalid shift in meaning of certain mathematical symbols - which at first designate <u>lengths</u>. and then surreptitiously are reassigned to designate <u>points</u>.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simultaneity possibly relative motion]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-29T05:19:59Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Simultaneity Cannot Possibly be Relative to Motion
| author = [[John E. Chappell]]
| keywords = [[Simultaneity]], [[Relativity]], [[Motion]]
| published = 1999
| journal = [[None]]
}}

==Abstract==

A slightly modified version of the 1962 critique by philosopher Melbourne Evans (Emeritus, Univ. of New Mexico) shows that (I) in the famous moving train thought experiment he used to introduce his spatial theory of relativity, Einstein reached his result of relative simultaneity only by contradicting himself within the same chain of reasoning; and furthermore that (2) avoiding such a contradiction will lead inevitably to absolute simultaneity, whatever velocity is attributed to light. As shown in a 1968 book by Rosser, another kind of attempt to validate relative simultaneity, a mathematical "proof' based on the Lorentz transformations, rests entirely on an invalid shift in meaning of certain mathematical symbols - which at first designate lengths. and then surreptitiously are reassigned to designate points.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]