Jimmy Wales wrote:
I know too little about physics to have anything
helpful to say here.
Reading between the lines here, I'm guessing that Mr. Royce's views
are not mainstream? Is there any helpful accomodation that could be
made here?
A quick google search shows that this guy is a sci.physics.relativity
crackpot. See:
http://groups.google.com.au/groups?selm=XySVa.41611%24F92.4248%40afrodite.t…
----- Forwarded message from Roy Royce <roy_q_royce(a)hotmail.com> -----
From: "Roy Royce" <roy_q_royce(a)hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 13:58:58 -0600
To: jwales(a)joey.bomis.com
Subject: --A Request RE a WIKI Article--
Dear Mr. Wales,
Your primary policy "You can edit this page right now" hopefully applies to
the
addition of facts to an article, especially important facts. However, it
seems to
be impossible to (permanently) add just three simple - but critical - facts
to the
Wiki special relativity article.
That's right, it's impossible to add facts permanently if they are
considered by community consensus to be inaccurate. It's the nature of
the process. Sounds like he's experiencing some Usenet withdrawal symptoms.
I cordially invite you to check out the validity of
the following statements
for
yourself (these are the three facts of which I spoke above):
[1] No one has yet used two clocks to measure the speed of light (one way).
[2] Since we have long had the necessary technology, the reason for the lack
of a one-way light speed measurement must be the physical impossibility of
making such a measurement. (In other words, there cannot be a one-way
version of the Michelson-Morley experiment, and scientific minds should
wonder
why not - because the implications are grave for special relativity!)
If anyone cares, this is what he's talking about:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=a0ac0bee.0211081401.61c7eee9%40posting…
Suffice to say that he doesn't seem to have any supporters on s.p.r,
where he's been plugging his theories for years. The tactic he's using
is a typical red herring: he suggests a direct test of some aspect of
relativity which is hugely expensive or perhaps even technically
impossible. He ignores the huge body of slightly less direct tests of
the same theory, and then obliquely suggests some sort of conspiracy
theory to explain why no-one is spending millions of dollars on his
simple test. Everywhere he goes, he feels persecuted by co-conspiring
mainstream physicists, who are out to suppress the "truth" he has
discovered. It's a common story.
My request is that someone please add these facts to
the Wiki special
relativity article because pertinent facts are important to any
encyclopedia.
Anyone can add them, and anyone can take them away. Luckily for us,
Wikipedian co-conspirators greatly outnumber the enlightened individuals
who want to expose the shocking truth.
-- Tim Starling.