วีดีโอ

@@KipIngram I don't understand such aggression from you. We don't know each other, you don't know my background as a physicist or my publications in international peer-reviewed journals on the subject. Are you a physicist specializing in relativity? I'm not forcing you to discuss anything with anyone. You came to my channel. If you don't like it, leave. If you prefer, I'll kick you out myself. Courtesy and calm arguments above all else.

@@germanodabramoLP My perception was that you were situating a narrative for purposes of undermining relativity. If that was a mistake on my part I apologize. I've just seen a lot of it online, taking many forms. Sometimes it's a direct assault on the theory itself, sometimes it's directed toward disputing Einstein's responsibility for it, etc. And it's just baffled me. So once again if I misread your presentation I'm sorry about that.

The goal of the video is to show that, based on what is publicly known - namely the mathematics of the GPS system, specifically the navigation equations - the proper functioning of GPS is independent of the application of relativistic corrections. Therefore, contrary to popular belief, the operation of GPS does not prove relativity. However, this does not mean claiming that relativity is wrong. Nevertheless, I encourage you to delve into the considerations of some scholars far more prestigious than the two of us, such as Herbert Dingle and Mendel Sachs, to name two, who have shown how relativity (especially special relativity, from which general relativity is derived) has a fundamental logical problem. And the fact that there are myriad experiments confirming it does not change the epistemological essence of the issue. One day, perhaps, I will also make a video about the real epistemic scope of experiments in physics, especially those in which the preparation and interpretation of results are strongly intertwined with the theory being tested.

Thank you for requesting clarification. I observed one side of my pen's feed under a loupe, right below the edge of the nib, and I noticed a thin line typical of injection molding running from the section almost to the tip of the feed. Additionally, after rubbing the flat part of the feed with my finger for a long time, I couldn't detect the burnt rubber smell typical of ebonite. I own many pens with ebonite feeds, both modern and vintage, and the material of this feed seems noticeably different. If you have more reliable information than mine, I would greatly appreciate it if you could share it

Anche io possiedo una versione con cappuccio in Nikargenta. Un giorno farò un video.

I appreciate your interesting observation! I do have a question about your thought experiment, though. It seems that it would also work if the box contained atomic-molecular gas. In that case, we cannot draw the same conclusion about atoms or molecules. Specifically, we cannot conclude that freely moving atoms or molecules are not affected by gravitational potential. Therefore, I have some concerns about the reliability of your thought experiment.

@@germanodabramoLP Let's modify the thought experiment: A physicist lifts and then drops down onto a concrete floor a photon-gas-tank many times. The photon-gas warms up. Works the same with molecular gas. Oh yes, the point of this is trying somehow to decide if the photon-gas gains energy, or rather blueshifts, when being lifted, or when free falling.