The Right Answer to the Wrong Question?

Are there Cliff Notes?

Were you possibly looking for an ambiguous answer?

42?

Please follow the link(s) if you have the time(They are a bit time consuming, but interesting.I found them to be enlightening although there is much I do not understand.)

Perhaps we have been pursuing the wrong questions for years?

We may be on the verge of a new Renaissance in the way we perceive the universe.

"We may look back on this period of science as "the dark ages"".

It's always Q4, oh wait, what was the question?

Hi HTRN,

Not sure about the "right answer ... wrong question" tag, but viewing this AFMayer site, and SKIMMING (about all this man's brain can absorb), the data ... then doing a little research on this chap ...

Well, all I can say is I LIKE IT when folks take the time to shake things up a bit. Of course, my depth of education can do little to truly analyze his hypothesis or conclusions, but educationally he seems at least well founded to make his claims.

After all, all we "know" is based on a series of ideas and proofs, and like our views of history (for instance) based mostly on only what we were told. For topics such as this (and so many others) where I haven't the mental horsepower neither to participate nor contest, I am glad for folks such as this who can push and test the scientific community.

Kind regards ...

Having skimmed through his slides I have similar comments as DcaD. I am not smart enough of versed enough to make an intelligent evaluation. Those who are are too biased to give people like this a chance.

I agree that present theories are wrong. There are many who are challenging them. The problem is that the "establishment" won't give them a chance to be heard, so the internet is their only way to do it. Here is another guy who has some tweaks on relativity. I have not yet read any links from this particular site.

Thanks for the link. I will attempt to eat that elephant one bite at the time,so it may be a while before, and if, I can digest it all.

I just read the part "Death by Mathematics". I know very little of the math spoken of, but was of that opinion already. It was nice to have someone who knows it to have that same opinion.

The preface of the book and chapter 1 are long, but hang in there. The meat of the relativity is in chapter 2.

I will attempt to eat that elephant one bite at the time

Yes, there is certainly a lot to read. I didn't intend to take over your thread, but would like to discuss some of his writing. If you would like, one of us could start another thread. I am certainly chewing on it, but not sure how much I can swallow. There seems to be some confusion in the progression of chapters. Here is something I like from the paper "The Perihelion Precession of Mercury":

let us say I have a theory about how to measure the length of my desk. This theory supplies me with equations. Using these equations, I find the number x centimeters for the length of my desk. I now measure my desk and find that my desk is actually x + 4 centimeters. My equations have failed. Logically, this means that I must come up with a new set of equations. I can't come up with a second set of equations that applies only to the gap of 4 centimeters, continuing to use my old equations for the rest. But this is precisely what Einstein did. He allowed the failed equations of Newton to define the gap, then used a new net of equations to fill the gap. There is no other way to describe that, except gloriously bad math and logic. This gloriously bad math and logic belongs to everyone in past 150 years, not just Einstein, since everyone accepted this procedure (and still does).

Einstein knew the answer before he found the method and the formulas. He eventually found one that gave the right answer. There may be a thousand that do that. That doesn't make them right. So Einstein may have had the right answer to the wrong question.