2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

In: Galilean electrodynamics. 15. 2004, Nr. 4 =
July/August, Beilage "special insert pages", datiert
1. Mai 2004, darin 1 Seite.
Status: Kritik. - Quelle: Autopsie.
Hayden, Howard C. 2005
Richard Hazelett's work / Howard Hayden.
In: Galilean electrodynamics. 16. 2005, Nr. 2, S. 30.
SRT. IVES. HIS.
Empfehlender Hinweis auf das 1979 in den USA erschienene
Sammelwerk "The Einstein Myth and the
Ives papers", eine Festschrift für Herbert Eugene Ives,
einen Physiker und Ingenieur, der zeitlebens Albert
Einsteins SRT kritisiert hat. Herausgeber der Festschrift
sind Dean Turner und Richard Hazelett. Der Sammelband
enthält nicht nur alle für das Thema relevanten
Veröffentlichungen von Ives, sondern auch Abdrucke
einer großen Anzahl von einschlägigen Arbeiten anderer
Autoren. Darin liegt der große Wert und Nutzen
dieses Sammelwerks für den Leser, der sich die Beschaffung
vieler Zeitschriftenjahrgänge ersparen kann.
Hayes, Peter 2009
Has Einstein failed physics? : University of Sunderland,
12 May 2009 (www.sunderland.ac.uk): news
release / Peter Hayes.
In: AlphaGalileo. Europe's leading source of
research news (= www.alphagalileo.org).
Full bibliographic information: Social Epistemology,
January 2009.
SRT. ZD. ZWP. SOZIO.
Auszüge: "The £3.6bn Large Hadron Collider is one of
world's most advanced scientific experiments, built to
smash protons together at huge speeds, recreating
conditions moments after the Big Bang. Unfortunately
it doesn't work. Now a new paper by a North East academic
presents the intriguing possibility that the Large
Hadron Collider didn't work not because of mechanical
failure, but because basic theories of physics may be
wrong.
Dr Peter Hayes says: "Theoretical physicists have
been barking up the wrong tree for the last hundred
years - because Albert Einstein's theory of relativity is
inconsistent. "Over the years many people have pointed
out that there are logical flaws in the theory. Back in
the 1960s Professor Herbert Dingle warned that large
scale experiments drawing on relativity theory might
end by destroying the world. Perhaps we are lucky that
the Large Hadron Collider merely broke down!"
Dr Peter Hayes is senior lecturer in politics at the
University of Sunderland. In his latest paper 'The Ideology
of Relativity' Dr Hayes argues that Albert Einstein's
theory of relativity - perhaps the most famous scientific
theory in history - should be viewed as an ideology, not
as a science. He argues that its impact on popular culture
and science has been so influential precisely because as
a scientific theory it doesn't actually make sense. - Dr
Hayes says: "Einstein's theory of relativity contained
elementary inconsistencies, but in 1919 when the theory
became popularly known, the world had come through
a terrible war followed by a flu pandemic. Einstein's
ideas were the tonic they needed. In the rush to celebrate
them few people stopped to question the obvious logical
flaws in the theory." [...]
A famous flaw in Einstein's theory is the Clock
Paradox. This states that if one clock travels in a spaceship,
while the other stays on earth, when the clock in
the spaceship returns it will show that less time has
elapsed than the clock on earth. This prediction violates
Einstein's own 'principle of relativity', which states that
if you are on the spaceship it should be the clock back
on earth that slows down. This is a criticism that science
has never been able to satisfactorily resolve."
Hayes, Peter 2009
The ideology of relativity: the case of the clock
paradox / Peter Hayes.
In: Social epistemology. 23. 2009, Issue 1, January,
S. 57-78.
Referat unter URL: http://philpapers.org/rec/HAYTIO-2
SRT. UHREN. PARAD. ANTISEM. SOZIO.
"Abstract. - In the interwar period there was a significant
school of thought that repudiated Einstein's theory of
relativity on the grounds that it contained elementary
inconsistencies. Some of these critics held extreme rightwing
and anti-Semitic views, and this has tended to
discredit their technical objections to relativity as being
scientifically shallow. This paper investigates an alternative
possibility: that the critics were right and that
the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them
was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a
science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity
theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it
scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies,
however, make the theory ideologically powerful. The
implications of this argument are examined with respect
to Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper's accounts of the
philosophy of science."
Heaviside, Oliver 2002
[Brief an Vilhelm Frimann Køren Bjerknes / Auszug]:
[datiert: "8/3/20"] / Oliver Heaviside.
In: Bjerknes, Christopher Jon: Albert Einstein: the
incorrigible plagiarist, Xtx, 2002, pp. 25-26. =
http://home.comcast.net/~xtxinc/
modusoperandi.htm
SRT. AET. ERK.
C. J. Bjerknes zitiert aus dem Brief von Heaviside an
V. F. K. Bjerknes, S. 25-26: "I don't find Einstein's
Relativity agrees with me. It is the most unnatural and
difficult to understand way of representing facts that
Textversion 1.2 - 2012 147
G. O. Mueller: SRT Kap. 4-Erg..