Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008

Except that you'd "red flag" your own mother.  In the world of Igor,
change or revision of anything is not allowed.  Can you prove yourself
otherwise?

-     Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

For some reason I feel like a serious response.

As flaky as

"In neither system (meaning frame of reference in modern-day
terminology) is the speed of light c-v or c+v.  In both systems
the speed of light is c." - The Black Assertion.

Why did Einstein say           (that's Einstein, not Jimmy Black)
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,                (in the K-frame)
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,               (in the K-frame)
the "time" each way is the same?                      (in the k-frame)

"He does not claim that light moves with velocity c-v in the K-frame." -
refer to the Black assertion.

Flaky, huh?

The first thing I thought after reviewing that web site was: that I expect
to find such stuff here in the Usenet, but certainly not in a 2 page add in
Scientific American. I like that magazine- it's fun to read but publishing
that advertisement certainly lowers their credibility.

Joe

Did you bother to nicely ask the author via his website or email
feedback, or is taking everything out of context simply good enough?

-     Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

Jim, most scientist will agree with you here. I think that you and I
both recall the magnifience articles published in Scintific American,
right thorough the last 1970,  I actually (and this is a true story)
of a close friend who woked an earned his doctorate) because he wanted
his Scientific American subscripton to be mailed to him a "Dr. ....".
Again, I am not making this up.

Realize, that for at least 30 years, Scientific American was the
bridge that connected the professional scientific journals to the lay
public. They primarily had their article written by the researchers
themselves, and the publication held consideralble value to both the
puubic and to reaearachers actually performing the research.  Most of
the article were devoted to the physical science.

I'm not sure that I can exactly recall the chain of events that led to
the compromise of Scientific American, but I believe it took place
around 1960 (give or take a decade or two) where it passed though a
multiple seriies of owners. When I allowed my subsciption to lapse, it
was the result of a change still another ownership.

IIRC, the decline of Scientific American began after the first change
of ownership in the magizine, at which point all of the regular
editors and contributors were abruptly fired.  Most of the other
specialty goups were also disconued  A regular feature of the
magazine, the 'Amateir Scientist' never recovered.  Since then, I
belive that the magazine was sold to a German publishing firm, who has
yet to figure out what all of the original immense newstand popularity
of Scientific American was based upon.

I belive that you and I both know what the tragic error was.

Harry C.