Re: The truth about the Lorentz Transformation.

On 09/18/2024 01:14 PM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 09/18/2024 03:08 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:
>

Mikko: In reality, it only applies to an ether. Otherwise, Galilean
transformations apply. You are mistaken, as shown in my first comment.
You have not replied to it. The big ego mathematicians here would reply
that it must be used at speeds near light speed. That is not true
without an ether.

>
And it doesn't have anything to do with phlogiston either,
>
Jan
>
>

>
Oh, how about a-diabatic, and, non-a-diabatic?
>
Hey have you heard that JWST roundly paint-canned inflationary cosmology?
>

Anybody who introduces and adds to the theory
"dark matter", why galaxies hold together, and
"dark energy", why galaxies drift apart,
instead of just noting that it falsifies the model,
actually adding un-observables which are non-scientific,
is guilty of having commited a stupid and the non-scientific.
Articles the other day, "latest cyclotron results
definitely say Higgs is on the red dot", and it's like,
https://cms.cern/news/cms-fired-shot-heavy-higgs-particles-and-gun-smoking
"Enter the Two Higgs Doublet Model (2HDM), ...".
I.e., Higgs is on either side of the dot,
yet not exactly spot-on, ....
Then of course there's Little Higgs and
real gravitons, and Supersymmetry is alive
again three different ways.
And what those news articles are just so much
as of an asthma-inhaler or something, and it's
like, "quit huffing the fumes".