5 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: numbers-0-9.jpg]
I have some number sequences that I can't figure out. Maybe you can help.
A) 135, 791, ?, 151
B) 138, 257, ?, 132
C) 24, 16, 25, 66, ?, 36
Special Relativity proven wrong
1 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: borat.jpg]
In his book 'Relativity: The Special and General Theory', Einstein gives a seemingly simple and elegant derivation of the Lorentz transformation which goes as follows:
he considers the 'equations of motion' of a light signal in the unprimed and primed frame
and correspondingly for a light signal travelling along the negative x-axis:
(note that Eqs.(1a) and (2a) are not written explicitly in Einstein's book (see here)).
From these equations, he concludes then
(3) x'-ct'= ?.(x-ct)
(4) x'+ct'= ?.(x+ct)
and by adding and subtracting Eqs.(3) and (4) he gets the formal Lorentz transformation
(5a) x' = ax -bct
(5b) ct' = act -bx
(6) a= (?+?)/2
(7) b= (?-?)/2 .
Now it is obvious that the equations (1),(2) on the one hand and (1a),(2a) on the other are algebraically inconsistent unless the first set of equations is restricted to x,x'>0 in the first case and x,x'<0 in the second. So the generalized Eqs.(3) and (4) must then be restricted in the same sense in order not to violate the original constraint. But Einstein simply ignores this, and assumes that (3) and (4) hold both for positive and negative x,x' in order to be able to add and subtract the equations.
38 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: 5ba12f4158ade0f362147248b(...).jpg]
What are your thoughts on this picture.
I'm sure many of you may think it's a hoax.
But here's a few facts to date.
>Nine or ten ribs instead of the 12 that is found in a healthy human skeleton
>DNA is 94% human
>Bones contain millimetre sized holes consistent with arteries fuelling bone marrow. This suggests that if it was a hoax, it was performed by the best micro-surgeon in the world
>"The X-Ray and CT scan show an intact, actual biological humanoid organism, without question. Astonishing 3-D images were able to be constructed of the body from the detailed CT scan, and we were able to see internal organs such as lungs and what I am fairly sure is a heart structure"
>"I can say with absolute certainty that it is not a monkey. It is human -- closer to human than chimpanzees. It lived to the age of six to eight. Obviously, it was breathing, it was eating, it was metabolizing. It calls into question how big the thing might have been when it was born"
So, what is /sci/'s thoughts?
Deformed human or first alien corpse which the governments couldn't take control of?