Ardeshir Mehta's Critique
of
Prof. Bryan Luther's Web Article Entitled

Originally on this page I had critiqued Prof. Bryan
Luther's Web article Credo:
Einstein's Train by quoting most of it line by line and sentence
by sentence, and including the pictures which he has drawn and referred
to in his text, so that anyone reading my critique might be able to see
that I had neither misquoted nor misinterpreted his original words; but
Prof. Luther objected, and wrote to me via e-mail saying: "... it is a
violation of copyright and intellectual property law to publish whole chunks
of the page. Please either remove the page or modify it."
I wrote back saying that the Copyright
Website would seem to indicate that my use of his material definitely
fell under the "fair use" provisions of the copyright laws for the purposes
of criticism, since it is written:
...
the critical determination is whether the quality and value of the materials
used are reasonable in relation to the purpose of copying. This is not
a pure ratio test in that using a whole work may be fair use in some circumstances,
whereas using a tiny fraction of a work not qualify for fair use in other
circumstances.
But I added that in any case, if Prof. Luther
insisted, I would modify my article - indeed I would replace my original
article with the one you are at present reading.
Now it may be just me, but I for one wonder at
Prof. Luther's motivations. It's not as if his Web page has any commercial
value which is being eroded by my quoting him extensively for purposes
of criticism. Surely a seeker after truth - as every scientist is supposed
to be - would appreciate all criticism, for if it is correct then something
new would be learned, whereas if it is wrong it does no harm. Indeed if
my criticism is in fact wrong, I myself would appreciate Prof. Luther showing
exactly where it is wrong, using reason and logic, so that I might learn
something new. But it makes me wonder what his motivation could be for
resorting instead to an attempt to make it difficult to criticise him objectively
and in detail: i.e., by my quoting for the benefit of readers exactly
what he wrote, which ensures that I am neither misquoting his words nor
taking them out of context. However, I leave readers to make up their own
minds on the subject.
In any case the point is moot, isn't it, for in
Einstein's logic in his "Train" thought-experiment were accepted as valid,
then with that same logic one would have to conclude that it takes light
longer to go from the rear end to the front end of a moving train,
than it takes light to go from the front end to the rear end of the very
same train: which contradicts Einstein's Postulate of the Constancy
of the Speed of Light!
Ardeshir Mehta.
Any comments? E-mail
me.

|