NEO NEWTONISTE THEORIE
Yanick Toutain
> "The Observational Collapse of Einsteinian Physics"
>
> Observations made in the field of Quantum Physics have already
> established that the concept that space and time are different aspects of
> the same entity - "space-time" is flawed. This concept was based on the
> recognition that the Lorentz Transformations resulting from velocity and our
> inability to transmit information faster than the velocity of light made it
> impossible to establish our absolute velocity through space observationally.
> Physicists who were more enamored with mathematical elegance than with
> establishing a better understanding of the way the Universe works extended
> that impossibility to generate the belief that an absolute velocity did not
> exist! This leads to logical contradictions, as Dr. Einstein recognized
> instinctively, causing him to resist the idea of "space-time" for about 25
> years after the publication of Special Relativity and asserting that the
> "space-time" concept required the existence of an infinite number of
> Aethers!
>
> Lately, Quantum physicist have made observations which demonstrate
> that, of the two current explanations of quantum theory, the one which
> requires that the velocity of propagation of quantum effects be infinite
> velocity rather than being limited to the velocity of light, is consistent
> with the results of observation. Experiments have shown that the velocity of
> the coupling of the polarization angle (the quantum number of the photon) of
> "paired photons" occurs at a velocity of at least four times the velocity of
> light and perhaps at an infinite velocity. Such a coupling velocity prevents
> physicists from hiding behind the idea that there is no absolute velocity
> reference frame and forcibly re-establishes the idea of Aether and
> demolishes the idea of "space-time" as other than as a conventional
> mathematical abstraction.
>
> The idea that information can travel at a velocity greater than the
> velocity of light is not inconsistent with the requirements of Special
> Relativity. If one examines all of the conventional means of transmission of
> information one finds that they involve the transmission of energy (e.g.-
> light signals, radio signals, particle transmission, etc). If one examines
> the Lorentz Transformation for energy (F-L-T system of units), one finds
> that the units of energy are the product of the Lorentz Transformations
> Force and for Length. Since the Lorentz Transformation for Force (on axis)
> is unity, the Lorentz Transformation for Energy is equal to the
> Transformation for Length and is 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5). This transformation
> becomes infinite at the velocity of light and becomes imaginary at
> velocities above the velocity of light. Clearly, no observable process which
> involves energy can proceed faster than the velocity of light!
>
> The limitation imposed on the velocity of energy propagation does not
> apply to the velocity of propagation of the polarization angle of "paired
> photons". Since changing the polarization angle of a photon does not change
> its energy content, the limitation that Special Relativity imposes on the
> transmission of energy does not apply. To see how Special Relativity does
> impose a velocity limitation on the propagations of the polarization angle
> of "paired photons" one must apply the Lorentz Transformation for Angle to
> the problem. Angle is measured as the length along an arc divided by the
> radius of that arc. As a result, the Lorentz Transformation for Angle is
> (1-V^2/C^2)/(1-V^2/C^2), and is equal to unity at all velocities between
> +/-C! A simple calculus procedure shows that the Transformation for Angle
> remains unity even at the velocity of light, where the Transformation for
> Energy becomes Infinite!. Unlike the Transformation for Energy, at
> velocities above that of light, the Transformation for Angle does not become
> imaginary. It retains its value of unity for all velocities. From this it
> seems reasonable to conclude that the
> velocity limit for the propagation of polarization angle of such photons is
> infinity. It is the writer's belief that this results applies to all quantum
> numbers and that the current interpretation of Quantum Theory which asserts
> that quantum effects must pervade through all of space at an infinite
> velocity is the correct one. (The alternative idea, that alternate universes
> co-existing in the same space would seem to be a concept that is so absurd
> that it seems reasonable to wonder how much LSD its adherents absorbed
> during their college years.)
>
> Quite significant is the fact that the original "big bang" fireball
> from which our Universe is believed to have begun has been observed. We know
> its location and we know our velocity with respect to it. As a result we
> have actually observed our "absolute velocity" through space. Since this is
> impossible under the "space-time" concept, we seem to be forced back to the
> Lorentz Transformation - Aether Theory!
>
> When one recognizes that information CAN propagate at a velocity
> significantly greater that the velocity of light, the idea of a "ABSOLUTE
> TIME" cannot be dismissed, just as the idea cannot be dismissed by those who
> consider the virtually instantaneously travel between locations using
> "wormholes". A successful use of a "wormhole" in this manner would also
> effectively establish "ABSOLUTE SIMULTANIETY". Unfortunately for the
> intellectual status quo, "ABSOLUTE TIME" requires that the special case
> solution of Special Relativity represented by the Lorentz-Transformation
> Aether Theory represent our reality. The mathematical abstraction of
> space-time is just that,
> an abstraction which makes the computations of velocity effects easier, it
> has no physical significance. Nature doesn't actually give a damn about the
> abstractions we use to make computations simpler, it does care, however,
> about the useful function that the classical Aether performs. (Dr. Einstein
> is reported to have held on to the belief in absolute time, identical to a
> belief in the Aether theory, for 25 years after he published Special
> Relativity and to have warned "remember gentlemen, we have not proven that
> the Aether does not exist, we have merely proven that we do not need it for
> computations.) We have reached a point where the existence of the Aether has
> been observationally proven though the "paired photon" experiments. It is
> time for the mathematical idiot-savants to step aside and let intelligent
> men attack the problem objectively without fear of repression.
>
> Recently, astronomers in Australia announced that they have observed
> that the velocity of light in the early stages of the Universe was greater
> than it is now. At present, their observations are considered to be errors
> since the velocity of light is "known" to be constant. WRONG! The velocity
> of light is "a constant" only when measured with local units of measurement.
> It cannot be both constant and "a constant" unless the Lorentz
> Transformations for length and time are either equal or are unity. THEY
> AREN'T, they are reciprocal! In addition, cosmologists are struggling to
> make sense of the apparent speeding up of the expansion of the Universe at
> extreme distances from the original "fireball". It must be pointed out that
> both these
> observations would result if the correct gravitational transformations were
> employed, i.e-
>
> Force = 1
> Length = 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
> Time = G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
>
> instead of the erroneous ones which result from the naive error made in the
> original derivation of General Relativity which was plastered over with the
> fakery of "curved space". (There is no transformation for length in General
> Relativity.
>
> It is puzzling as to why there is a search for a mysterious additional
> repulsive force to explain the observed rate of expansion of the Universe.
> The reason that this is puzzling is the fact that nowhere in the discussions
> has the writer found that the radiation pressure of the 3K background, and a
> possibly much large pressure caused by neutrinos, has been taken into
> account. Since it is currently estimated that the energy represented by that
> radiation is at least 10 times the energy present in the matter contained in
> the Universe, it is easy to believe that the pressure produced by the
> radiation can easily produce the required espansive force. Is there proof
> that this is the case, probably not, but this source of expansive force has
> not been included in the calculations. With this viewpoint, the Universe
> would be analogous to a gas (radiation) filled balloon containing a
> sprinkling of dust (matter). (An article in the March 2003 issue of
> Scientific American describes the Universe as just such a dist filled
> gas-bag.)
>
> If one examines the big bang observations one finds that they are
> consistent with the Universe being formed within a gravitationally collapsed
> object when the correct gravitational transformations are employed. Such an
> object, as observed internally without accounting for the relativistically
> changed size of the units of measurement, would collapse and then, when that
> collapse had proceeded to a radius equal to four times the horizon radius,
> would be observed to expand explosively at the beginning and then settle
> down to a more moderate rate of expansion. In directions away from the
> observed source of the expansion, the rate of that expansion should also
> seem to be increasing due to the fact that we are also looking into the
> past. These effects are to be expected from the application of the corrected
> gravitational transformations to the problem. The effects described are
> rigorously derived inhttp://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm.
>
> The source material for this posting may be found inhttp://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm(1997);http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
> (1987); andhttp://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm(1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE
> ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
> TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
> MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
> REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
> THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
>
> All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at thehttp://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
>
> Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
> a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
> as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
> please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
> have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
>
> E-mail:- einsteinh...@isp.com. If you wish a reply, be sure that your
> mail reception is not blocked.
>
> The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
> years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
> MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
> individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
> questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
> objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
> Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
> exception for which a correction was provided.
J'ai essayé de lire votre texte à l'aide d'un traducteur automatique
http://svsurl.systransoft.com/?t=outputframeset&link=trans&task=11d1def534ea1be0--80c1747-11833e7c344-34c3
Je vous fais une première réponse en français
Après publication, je mettrai en dessous un lien qui vous permettra de
me lire en anglais (ou dans une autre langue pour ceux quoi voudraient
utiliser la page detraductionsystran {je suis publiphobe et utilise
gratuitement leur page : je travaille pour des fruitware}
----------------------------------------------------------
Vous semblez récuser Einstein en voulant supprimer le plafond 299 792
458 m/s
C'est inutile.
Si vous souhaitez examiner la grille théorique néo-newtonienne, allez
sur mon site.
monsyte
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=monsyte+newton&hl=fr&num=100&btnG=Recherche+Google&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&cr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=site.voila.fr&as_rights=&safe=images
Cela consiste à reprendre
TEMPS ABSOLU (TEMPS OBJECTIF)
LIEUX ABSOLUS (LIEUX OBJECTIFS)
DEPLACEMENTS ABSOLUS (DEPLACEMENTS OBJECTIFS)
VITESSES ABSOLUES (VITESESS OBJECTIVES)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
les équations vectorielles de Newton
du type
Vx2 = Vx1 - G M / ( c * t1) power 3 * X1 * délai
Vx1 vitesse absolue (sur l'axe des X)
G constante
M "masse" (calcul provisoire cfci-dessous)
t1 délai du signal
X1 coordonnée en X
délai : délai entre deux mesures
--------------------------------
DANS LE VIDE DE DEMOCRITOS NEWTON
En y ajoutant le DELAI DU TRAJET DU SIGNAL
En considérant les photons (les atomos à l'intérieur) comme les causes
de la gravitation
---------------------------------------------------------
extraits de la page :
http://site.voila.fr/monsyte/de/SCIENCES/scphys/Recherche/La_veritable_equation_de_la_gravitation_helio_planetaire.htm
_________________________________________________________
CONSTANTE DE DÉVIATION HÉLIOPLANÉTAIRE
La constante de déviation gravitationnelle hélioplanétaire est égale à
Kdevia = 2,17004 10-6
m 3 s -1 J -1
Sa signification :
Toute planète recevant une énergie locale, Eloc, en provenance du
Soleil, aura sa trajectoire déviée d'une quantité égale à :
Eloc * Kdevia
Eloc en
J s -1 m -2
Eloc calculée sur un plan perpendiculaire à la direction des photons
depuis le Soleil jusqu'à la planète
Cette quantité a les dimensions d'une accélération (mètres par
secondes²) mais correspond simplement à la quantité de déviation (en
direction du Soleil) de la trajectoire de la planète.
m s -2
Son usage est strictement identique à celui d'Isaac Newton concernant
l'accélération gravitationnelle.
Le vecteur vitesse est diminué d'une quantité égale à
Eloc*Kdevia*unitédetemps
Pour une valeur Eloc = 1367
Il suffit de multiplier 1367 par Kdevia
Soit 1367 * 2,17004 10-6 =
Et l'on trouve 0.002966448
Ce résultat indique que la trajectoire de la Terre est déviée de 2.97
millimètres par seconde
J s -1 m -2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cette grille rend erronée l'ellipse (les délais de réception ne sont
pas égaux aux délais d'émission des signaux gravitationnels)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Je vous renvoie à l'équation qui va prendre la place des âneries
positivistes de Lorentz
Elles sont Newton-compatibles
Merci
Yanick Toutain
Les crétins relativistes mal-polis sont dispensés de répondre (idem
pour les partisans du fasciste Heisenberg et de la mécanique
quantique)
Yanick Toutain
http://svsurl.systransoft.com/?t=outputframeset&link=trans&task=11d1def534ea1be0--80c1747-11833e7c344-382a
I make you a first French answer
After publication, I will put in lower part a bond which will allow
you
to read me in English (or in another language for those what would
like
to use the page detraductionsystran {I am publiphobe and uses
free their page: I work for fruitware}
----------------------------------------------------------
You seem to challenge Einstein while wanting to remove ceiling 299.792
458 m/s
It is useless.
If you wish to examine the néo-Newtonian theoretical grid, go
on my site.
monsyte
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=monsyte+newton&hl=fr&num=100&btnG=Recherche+Google&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&cr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=site.voila.fr&as_rights=&safe=images
That consists in beginning again
ABSOLUTE TIME (OBJECTIVE TIME)
ABSOLUTE PLACES (OBJECTIVE PLACES)
ABSOLUTE DISPLACEMENTS (OBJECTIVE DISPLACEMENTS)
ABSOLUTE VELOCITIES (OBJECTIVE VITESESS)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
vectorial equations of Newton
type
Vx2 = Vx1 - G M/(C * T1) power 3 * X1 * time
Vx1 absolute velocity (on the x axis)
G constant
M "masses" (provisional calculation cfci-dessous)
T1 time of the signal
X1 coordinated in X
time: deadline between two measurements
--------------------------------
IN THE VACUUM OF DEMOCRITOS NEWTON
By adding to it the TIME OF the WAY OF the SIGNAL
By considering the photons (atomos inside) as causes
gravitation
---------------------------------------------------------
extracts of the page:
http://site.voila.fr/monsyte/de/SCIENCES/scphys/Recherche/La_veritable_equation_de_la_gravitation_helio_planetaire.htm
_______________________________________________________
CONSTANT OF DEVIATION HÉLIOPLANÉTAIRE
The constant of gravitational deviation hélioplanétaire is equal to
Kdevia = 2,17004 10-6
m3 S -1 J -1
Its significance:
Any planet receiving a local energy, Eloc, coming from
Sun, will have its deviated trajectory of a quantity equalizes with:
Eloc * Kdevia
Eloc in
J S -1 m -2
Eloc calculated on a level perpendicular to the direction of the
photons
since the Sun to planet
This quantity has dimensions of an acceleration (meters by
seconds ²) but corresponds simply to the quantity of deviation (in
direction of the Sun) of the trajectory of planet.
m S -2
Its use is strictly identical to that of Isaac Newton concerning
gravitational acceleration.
The Flight Path Vector is decreased by a quantity equalizes with
Eloc*Kdevia*unitédetemps
For a Eloc value = 1367
It is enough to multiply 1367 by Kdevia
That is to say 1367 * 2,17004 10-6 =
And 0.002966448 are found
This result indicates that the trajectory of the Earth is deviated of
2.97
millimetres a second
J S -1 m -2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This grid makes erroneous the ellipse (the times of reception are not
not equal to the times of emission of the gravitational signals)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I return you to the equation which will take the place of the stupid
things
positivists of Lorentz
They are Newton-compatible
Thank you
Yanick Toutain
The relativistic cretins impolite fellows are exempted to answer (idem
for the partisans of the Heisenberg fascist and mechanics
quantum)
http://site.voila.fr/monsyte/de/SCIENCES/scphys/COURS/objectif/Cours_de_science_objective_Les_equations.htm