Difference between revisions of "Logical Analysis of Special Relativity"

From Natural Philosophy Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Imported from text file)
 
(Imported from text file)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{Infobox paper
 
{{Infobox paper
 
| title = Logical Analysis of Special Relativity
 
| title = Logical Analysis of Special Relativity
| author = [[John E. Chappell]]
+
| author = [[John E Chappell]]
 
| keywords = [[Special Relativity]]
 
| keywords = [[Special Relativity]]
 
| published = 1998
 
| published = 1998
Line 9: Line 9:
 
==Abstract==
 
==Abstract==
  
Special relativity (SR) is a construct of the subcultur. of physics, not a certain reflection of reality. It is inferior to various other theories that explain the same evidence because It is based on Invalid logic: its two postulates contradict each other, and each commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. The simultaneity thought experillent 15 totl:l1ly invalidated by violating the law of noncontradiction; suggestions are made on how to reinterpret it rationally in terms of aether theory.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]
+
Special relativity (SR) is a construct of the subcultur. of physics, not a certain reflection of reality. It is inferior to various other theories that explain the same evidence because It is based on Invalid logic: its two postulates contradict each other, and each commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. The simultaneity thought experillent 15 totl:l1ly invalidated by violating the law of noncontradiction; suggestions are made on how to reinterpret it rationally in terms of aether theory.
  
[[Category:Relativity]]
+
[[Category:Scientific Paper|logical analysis special relativity]]
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Relativity|logical analysis special relativity]]

Latest revision as of 19:40, 1 January 2017

Scientific Paper
Title Logical Analysis of Special Relativity
Author(s) John E Chappell
Keywords Special Relativity
Published 1998
Journal None

Abstract

Special relativity (SR) is a construct of the subcultur. of physics, not a certain reflection of reality. It is inferior to various other theories that explain the same evidence because It is based on Invalid logic: its two postulates contradict each other, and each commits the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. The simultaneity thought experillent 15 totl:l1ly invalidated by violating the law of noncontradiction; suggestions are made on how to reinterpret it rationally in terms of aether theory.