To specify is to know what formally makes, or formally constitutes, or determinately constitutes something to be what it is according to a principle of determinacy either inside or outside the thing. For example the substantial form of water, as an intrinsic determination, determines matter to be water. An accidental form of heat making or determining the water hot. Whilst a paint brush is extrinsically determined to be a brush from the determination of the brush to paint, or again, a shoe’s shape from the shape of a foot.
Relative is what is ordered towards another, whilst absolute is what is not ordered towards another. An absolute can be an absolute in one respect and a relative under another respect. For example a man as he is a man is an absolute, for man as man is not man according as man is ordered towards something other, but is a man as he is ordered towards being a man. However a man as an absolute, can also be considered by a power, such as an intellect, whereby the man can be considered as ordered say, economically under the notion of productive output, or under the notion of man as he is colored, of as he is of a particular height and so on. In this manner man is ordered towards another and is known as a relative.
The notions of movement, time, length and mass are all absolutes whereby each notion is to be defined from its nature, or IOW from what formally constitutes, or determinately constitutes something to be what it is according to a principle of determinacy inside the thing. But relativity ignores this truth and posits that definitions of movement, time, length and mass are to be made according to mathematical definitions, whereby these notions are to be judged as determined by quantities. But to define according to mathematical equations is to define according to accidentals, but accidentals are dependent upon natures, which are absolutes.
Therefore relativity implicitly assumes absolutes in the notions of movement, time, length and mass are true even though the theory purports to deny absolutes. Therefore relativity is invalidated.
Relativity denies the existence of absolutes, but absolutes are pre-required for relatives to exist. Therefore the notions of movement, time, length and mass according to relativity are unknowable and relativity is invalidated.
Lets see how problems arise when we consider relativistic mass. According to AE
In a 1948 letter to Lincoln Barnett, Einstein wrote
[quote]
"It is not good to introduce the concept of the mass M = m/(1-v2/c2)1/2 of a body for which no clear definition can be given. It is better to introduce no other mass than `the rest mass' m. Instead of introducing M, it is better to mention the expression for the momentum and energy of a body in motion." [/quote]
He readily admits that a relative mass given by his equation is hopelessly flawed and no clear definition can be given for relative mass. So what does he do to salvage his theory? He appeals to an arbitrary ‘rest mass’. But this will not resolve the problem, for in the electrodynamics of moving bodies in 1905 he says
[quote]
Examples of this sort, together with the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth relatively to the ``light medium,'' suggest that the phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest. [/quote]
According to his theory, the “phenomena of electrodynamics as well as of mechanics possess no properties corresponding to the idea of absolute rest “ But no properties includes the property of mass at rest. Relativistic mass has no meaning according to Albert and absolute mass is not permitted, so any notion of mass in relativity has no meaning. Therefore relativity is invalidated.
Also, as all motions are relative, there is no way to determine a state of rest exists, as all motions are determined by an arbitrary observer and each observer sees an event as relative. He is trapped within his own theory, which is full of contradictions and errors. Therefore relativity is invalidated.
Another problem with the relativistic mass equation is that it is derived using the notions of time (there are at least three different ways AE uses time), which have been shown to be full of errors. Therefore his relativistic mass equation is invalidated and relativity is invalidated.
Also, as all motions are relative, there is no way to determine a state of rest exists, as all motions are determined by an arbitrary observer and each observer sees an event as relative. He is trapped within his own theory, which is full of contradictions and errors. Therefore relativity is invalidated.
Another problem with the relativistic mass equation is that it is derived using the notions of time (there are at least three different ways AE uses time), which have been shown to be full of errors. Therefore his relativistic mass equation is invalidated and relativity is invalidated.
JM
No comments:
Post a Comment