Piano piano si va lontano
Ok...so if I am following Rodal's analysis correctly, Jack Sarfatti's counter to Woodward's argument is...overly broad? Flawed?No, not at all. Jack's review is not overly broad. On the contrary, it is very specific and well defined: with equations precisely showing what he means.
I only addressed a few words, less than 1%, of his review: the following few words
what about the other 99%? Is Jack correct?
Others in the forum can address the other 99%. Personally, before addressing any of the other 99%, I would like Mulletron's opinion regarding Woodward's statement
(this was recently addressed by none other than Fornaro here: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29276.msg1300761#msg1300761
The thing to keep in mind is “locally measured.” As measured by a particular observer,
c and phi have their invariant values wherever he or she is located. But everywhere else, the
values measured may be quite different from the local invariant values.
where Woodward states that the speed of light is only invariant to a local observer but "everywhere else, the values measured may be quite different from the local invariant values" as we have been arguing this before with Mulletron, regarding the speed of light in a dielectric (or water, for that matter) as compared to the speed of light in vacuum. I understand Mulletron's argument that between the particles in any media there is a vacuum, but to make calculations one has to resort to field equations, (as done by Woodward) and then it is more expedient to adopt this viewpoint.
However, for Woodward's formulation in particular this fine point becomes all the finer, as the Woodward Mach Effect depends on these derivatives
Hence, there is an insufficiently unexplored (from a theoretical and experimental viewpoint) problem here: as Woodward is using relativity field equations involving (time and space) derivatives in materials: I think its validity really, really requires experimental verification. Particularly when the Abraham/Minkowski paradox is unresolved.
Others may disagree with Woodward using relativity field equations for this, but I think he is (at least) consistent
in this particular issue ( I have not explored the other 99%) .