(2017-10-30, 05:01 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]Personally (and I know that I am in the minority on this), if I see something written with an obvious agenda in mind, I don't even bother reading it, even if it happens to support my own ideas/beliefs.
Linda
Anyone else see the irony?
(2017-10-30, 07:08 PM)Kamarling Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone else see the irony?
Personally (and I know that I am in the minority on this),
if I see something written with an obvious agenda in mind, I don't even bother reading it, even if it happens to support my own ideas/beliefs.
Linda Pssst
larf rofl
(2017-10-30, 05:22 PM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]AN EXPERIMENT that for eighty years has been cited by physicists as a confirmation of Einstein’s special theory of relativity is nothing of the sort. This remarkable discovery has been made not by a professional physicist but by an enthusiastic amateur.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1...e-experts/
Link isn't working even when doing a keyword search for the article.
(2017-10-30, 07:55 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]Link isn't working even when doing a keyword search for the article.
It worked for me on my phone, although it loaded a blank page and then loaded the article when I hit refresh.
Linda
(2017-10-30, 07:55 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]Link isn't working even when doing a keyword search for the article.
Hmm. It works for me. You could try this:
http://tinyurl.com/y72m3s98
(2017-10-30, 08:07 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]It worked for me on my phone, although it loaded a blank page and then loaded the article when I hit refresh.
Linda
(2017-10-30, 08:30 PM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]Hmm. It works for me. You could try this:
http://tinyurl.com/y72m3s98
This article is dated 1995. Doing a bit of sleuthing I have not found that Swift-Pelligrini carried out any experiment. It seems though others have and got a null result. The papers I looked are highly technical so it's entirely possible I am wrong.
More sleuthing produced this.
Measurement of the Relativistic Potential Difference Across a Rotating Dielectric Cylinder
https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0104101
(2017-10-30, 11:29 PM)Steve001 Wrote: [ -> ]This article is dated 1995. Doing a bit of sleuthing I have not found that Swift-Pelligrini carried out any experiment. It seems though others have and got a null result. The papers I looked are highly technical so it's entirely possible I am wrong.
More sleuthing produced this. Measurement of the Relativistic Potential Difference Across a Rotating Dielectric Cylinder
https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0104101
Yes - it looks as though the subject is still controversial. The most recent publication I could find is one from this year:
https://books.google.com/books?id=UfetDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA247
The author's point is that there's no adequate theory for even simple electromagnetic phenomena within material that is accelerating. The amateur, Pellegrini, had questioned the assumption that they could be treated by ignoring the acceleration. At any rate, it seems he had a point, if more than 20 years later there's no scientific consensus about the question.
(2017-10-30, 05:22 PM)Chris Wrote: [ -> ]AN EXPERIMENT that for eighty years has been cited by physicists as a confirmation of Einstein’s special theory of relativity is nothing of the sort. This remarkable discovery has been made not by a professional physicist but by an enthusiastic amateur.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg1...e-experts/
Interesting article. I’m not sure Pellegrini isn’t an expert even though he isn’t a
professional physicist. If I read the article correctly it looks like he has spent many years thinking about the subject. A person can be an expert in some subjects without formal qualifications don’t you think? Did I miss something?
He certainly not a professional physicist as I read it but I am not sure that makes him a lay person either in practical terms (although I guess technically it does).
(2017-10-31, 12:03 PM)Obiwan Wrote: [ -> ]Interesting article. I’m not sure Pellegrini isn’t an expert even though he isn’t a professional physicist. If I read the article correctly it looks like he has spent many years thinking about the subject. A person can be an expert in some subjects without formal qualifications don’t you think? Did I miss something?
He certainly not a professional physicist as I read it but I am not sure that makes him a lay person either in practical terms (although I guess technically it does).
That's a good point. My rather old dictionary gives "non-professional" as the meaning of lay relevant to this discussion. But amateurs can certainly acquire expertise (and professionals don't always possess it). So probably one can be both an "expert" and a "layperson".