12 Year old boy disproves Einstein's theory while eating a sandwich

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
reply to post by riktus

 

Whoah, no offence to the boy genius but I'll believe that when I see it! The media does have a reputation of stretching the truth to make it sound impressive. But like I said, only when Jake publishes his new theory, is accepted by scientists, will I believe this.

edit on 29-3-2011 by CasiusIgnoranze because: (no reason given)

Ok, perhaps toppling Einstein is a bit too much. But the level of understanding that he has for a 12 year old is superb. With an IQ of only 170, perhaps he will be able to amount to something (for a contrast, look up William Sidhis, the boy with an IQ over 300, of "god like intelligence", and see how "god" is able to cope with human life).

I have a 13 year old that most would say is incredibly insightful and extremely well spoken. With how outstanding of a kid he is intellectually, this kid makes him look simple. As a matter of fact, I would be that the majority of what he says is beyond your comprehension as well, and thus the generic dsmissive statement.

Originally posted by Blarneystoner

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze

 

When are you going to realize that scientists do not know anything?


Of course i can develop an idea and prove it through some abstract method of observation. I created the observation method to observe what it is i want it to.

One day your going to realize that the world exist in your mind. Hopefully that day is not the day you die.

"The world exists in your mind..."

Maybe your imaginary theory could be proven with some imaginary experiments, and then some fellow imaginary scientists will try to replicate the imaginary results of the imaginary experiments you did to prove your imaginary theory and, if they are able to, those same imaginary peers could do an imaginary review and then your imaginary theory could be published in the imaginary science journal and then we could all pretend to read it!!

edit on 29-3-2011 by Blarneystoner because: It was all in my mind....

LOL!! excuse me moderators but im TYPELESS!!

Okay, I watched the video, and I see what the kid is saying, which is a lot like what I've been saying for several years. When he says a photon accelerates perpendicular to its direction of travel, he's thinking in Euclidean space. The thing about Minkowski space-time is that the path of light is the defintion of a straight line, so light does not accelerate sideways. In Minkowski space-time, a photon's momentum and energy increase as it falls into a gravity well, but the direction of the momentum vector does not change. I believe this is why it is claimed that light has no mass. In Euclidean space, light obviously does have mass because the direction of its momentum vector does change, and the star whose gravity is causing the change must receive an equal and opposite change of momentum.

So he hasn't proven Einstein wrong. He's a bit confused, yet, but he is beginning to understand the difference between the two brands of space. When he does see that difference clearly, I hope he will agree with me that both brands of mathematical space are valid analogies for physical space. Both have their uses, strengths and weaknesses.

He disproved nothing. He questioned it and it is amazing to hear him speak and think about such, but disproves? Sensationalize much?

He even admits he hasn't worked out his theory; in which I hope he does. Great visionary thinkers are rare and this kid has some big shoes to fill.

reply to post by davidgrouchy


Like I said, the media does have a reputation of stretching the truth to make things sound impressive
But, he'll probably contribute something else to science when he's a bit older perhaps.