info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
EINSTEIN'S SCIENCE: NOT EVEN INSANE
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Pentcho Valev
Aug 30, 2015, 7:57:01 AM8/30/15
to
https://royalsociety.org/events/2015/09/is-our-universe-a-hologram/
The Royal Society: "It may sound like science fiction, but a lesser known branch of string theory, holography, is stepping into the limelight with some bold ideas about our universe. Holography predicts that all the information in our 3D universe is contained in a mysterious 2D image, like a hologram. Promising not only to unite Einstein's relativity with quantum physics, holography has the potential to provide us with cleaner energy, faster computers, and novel electronics."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28090-stephen-hawking-says-he-has-a-way-to-escape-from-a-black-hole/
New Scientist: "Now Hawking says this information never makes it inside the black hole in the first place. "I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect, but on its boundary, the event horizon," he said today. The event horizon is the sphere around a black hole from inside which nothing can escape its clutches. Hawking is suggesting that the information about particles passing through is translated into a kind of hologram - a 2D description of a 3D object - that sits on the surface of the event horizon. "The idea is the super translations are a hologram of the ingoing particles," he said. "Thus they contain all the information that would otherwise be lost." So how does that help something escape from the black hole? In the 1970s Hawking introduced the concept of Hawking radiation - photons emitted by black holes due to quantum fluctuations. Originally he said that this radiation carried no information from inside the black hole, but in 2004 changed his mind and said it could be possible for information to get out. Just how that works is still a mystery, but Hawking now thinks he's cracked it. His new theory is that Hawking radiation can pick up some of the information stored on the event horizon as it is emitted, providing a way for it to get out. But don't expect to get a message from within, he said. "The information about ingoing particles is returned, but in a chaotic and useless form. This resolves the information paradox. For all practical purposes, the information is lost." (...) More details are expected later today when one of Hawking's collaborators Malcom Perry expands on the idea, and Hawking and his colleagues say they will publish a paper on the work next month, but it's clear he is gunning for the idea that black holes are inescapable. It's even possible information could get out into parallel universes, he told the audience yesterday."
Pentcho Valev
The Royal Society: "It may sound like science fiction, but a lesser known branch of string theory, holography, is stepping into the limelight with some bold ideas about our universe. Holography predicts that all the information in our 3D universe is contained in a mysterious 2D image, like a hologram. Promising not only to unite Einstein's relativity with quantum physics, holography has the potential to provide us with cleaner energy, faster computers, and novel electronics."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28090-stephen-hawking-says-he-has-a-way-to-escape-from-a-black-hole/
New Scientist: "Now Hawking says this information never makes it inside the black hole in the first place. "I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect, but on its boundary, the event horizon," he said today. The event horizon is the sphere around a black hole from inside which nothing can escape its clutches. Hawking is suggesting that the information about particles passing through is translated into a kind of hologram - a 2D description of a 3D object - that sits on the surface of the event horizon. "The idea is the super translations are a hologram of the ingoing particles," he said. "Thus they contain all the information that would otherwise be lost." So how does that help something escape from the black hole? In the 1970s Hawking introduced the concept of Hawking radiation - photons emitted by black holes due to quantum fluctuations. Originally he said that this radiation carried no information from inside the black hole, but in 2004 changed his mind and said it could be possible for information to get out. Just how that works is still a mystery, but Hawking now thinks he's cracked it. His new theory is that Hawking radiation can pick up some of the information stored on the event horizon as it is emitted, providing a way for it to get out. But don't expect to get a message from within, he said. "The information about ingoing particles is returned, but in a chaotic and useless form. This resolves the information paradox. For all practical purposes, the information is lost." (...) More details are expected later today when one of Hawking's collaborators Malcom Perry expands on the idea, and Hawking and his colleagues say they will publish a paper on the work next month, but it's clear he is gunning for the idea that black holes are inescapable. It's even possible information could get out into parallel universes, he told the audience yesterday."
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Aug 30, 2015, 12:55:51 PM8/30/15
to
Kip Thorne teaches that in 1905 Einstein disproved... Newton's law of gravity, and that Newton's law predicted... no deflection of light:
http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3169&context=space-congress-proceedings
Kip Thorne: "Despite its great successes, Newton's law of gravity is not correct. This was first recognized by Albert Einstein in 1905. At that time he had just formulated his special theory of relativity, and had discovered a logical incompatibility between it and Newtonian gravity. (...) A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas Newton's law predicted no deflection. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity."
Pentcho Valev
http://commons.erau.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3169&context=space-congress-proceedings
Kip Thorne: "Despite its great successes, Newton's law of gravity is not correct. This was first recognized by Albert Einstein in 1905. At that time he had just formulated his special theory of relativity, and had discovered a logical incompatibility between it and Newtonian gravity. (...) A second crucial proof of the breakdown in Newtonian gravity was the relativistic bending of light. Einstein's theory predicted that starlight passing near the limb of the sun should be deflected by 1.75 seconds of arc, whereas Newton's law predicted no deflection. Observations during the 1919 eclipse of the sun in Brazil, carried out by Sir Arthur Eddington and his British colleagues, brilliantly confirmed Einstein's prediction to an accuracy of about 20 percent. This dealt the final death blow to Newton's law and to most other relativistic theories of gravity."
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Aug 30, 2015, 3:34:17 PM8/30/15
to
If, in order for Divine Albert's Divine Theory to remain true, a rivet shank length should increase beyond the proper length, it does increase beyond the proper length:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Relativ/bugrivet.html
"In an attempt to squash a bug in a 1 cm deep hole, a rivet is used. But the rivet is only 0.8 cm long so it cannot reach the bug. The rivet is accelerated to 0.9c. (...) The paradox is not resolved."
In the rivet's frame, "the end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall" - the bug is squashed. In the bug's frame, "the rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole" - the bug remains alive.
Needless to say, the bug being squashed in the rivet's frame and alive in the bug's frame is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory. Accordingly, Einsteinians resort to an idiotic ad hoc "requirement" - the rivet shank length miraculously increases beyond its at-rest length and poor bug gets squashed in both frames:
http://math.ucr.edu/~jdp/Relativity/Bug_Rivet.html
John de Pillis Professor of Mathematics: "In fact, special relativity requires that after collision, the rivet shank length increases beyond its at-rest length d."
http://brianclegg.blogspot.fr/2011_11_01_archive.html
Brian Clegg: "Unfortunately, though, the rivet is fired towards the table at a fair percentage of the speed of light. It's somewhat typical of this book that all it tells us about the speed is that γ is 2, which doesn't really give you an idea of how fast the rivet is going, but if my back of an envelope calculations are right, this is around 0.87 times the speed of light. Quite a fast rivet, then. (...) But here's the thing. Just because the head of the rivet has come to a sudden stop doesn't mean the whole rivet does. A wave has to pass along the rivet to its end saying 'Stop!' The end of the rivet will just keep on going until this wave, typically travelling at the speed of sound, reaches it. That fast-moving end will crash into the beetle long before the wave arrives. (...) Isn't physics great?"
Note: The end of the rivet keeps on going at 87% the speed of light and a wave travelling at the speed of sound is chasing it in order to stop it! Not even insane!
Pentcho Valev
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Relativ/bugrivet.html
"In an attempt to squash a bug in a 1 cm deep hole, a rivet is used. But the rivet is only 0.8 cm long so it cannot reach the bug. The rivet is accelerated to 0.9c. (...) The paradox is not resolved."
In the rivet's frame, "the end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall" - the bug is squashed. In the bug's frame, "the rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole" - the bug remains alive.
Needless to say, the bug being squashed in the rivet's frame and alive in the bug's frame is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory. Accordingly, Einsteinians resort to an idiotic ad hoc "requirement" - the rivet shank length miraculously increases beyond its at-rest length and poor bug gets squashed in both frames:
http://math.ucr.edu/~jdp/Relativity/Bug_Rivet.html
John de Pillis Professor of Mathematics: "In fact, special relativity requires that after collision, the rivet shank length increases beyond its at-rest length d."
http://brianclegg.blogspot.fr/2011_11_01_archive.html
Brian Clegg: "Unfortunately, though, the rivet is fired towards the table at a fair percentage of the speed of light. It's somewhat typical of this book that all it tells us about the speed is that γ is 2, which doesn't really give you an idea of how fast the rivet is going, but if my back of an envelope calculations are right, this is around 0.87 times the speed of light. Quite a fast rivet, then. (...) But here's the thing. Just because the head of the rivet has come to a sudden stop doesn't mean the whole rivet does. A wave has to pass along the rivet to its end saying 'Stop!' The end of the rivet will just keep on going until this wave, typically travelling at the speed of sound, reaches it. That fast-moving end will crash into the beetle long before the wave arrives. (...) Isn't physics great?"
Note: The end of the rivet keeps on going at 87% the speed of light and a wave travelling at the speed of sound is chasing it in order to stop it! Not even insane!
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
Aug 31, 2015, 9:58:08 AM8/31/15
to
http://books.google.com/books?id=JokgnS1JtmMC
Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p. 106: "The effect is mutual. Each of us finds the other's lengths in the direction of our relative motion contracted. When FitzGerald and Lorentz and Poincaré spoke of a contraction, they thought of it as arising from motion through the ether. Undoubtedly they silently assumed that someone at rest in the ether would find that moving lengths were contracted but that a moving observer would find that lengths at rest in the ether were expanded compared with his own. And the even greater silence of these scientists about the slowing of clocks shows that in spite of their mathematical equations being the same as Einstein's, the idea of a reciprocal slowing of clocks was foreign to their views."
That is, FitzGerald and Lorentz and Poincaré adhered to a false but still rational physical picture: a unilateral length contraction caused by the interaction of the moving object with the ether. By introducing mutual length contraction and mutual time dilation (idiotic offsprings of his 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate), Einstein actually killed rationality in science. Nowadays Einsteinians gloriously trap unlimitedly long objects inside unlimitedly short containers while singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity":
http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativity-4engineers.com/images/Ladder_paradox_garage_irf1.png
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQHPAeiiQ3w
"How fast does a 7 m long buick need to go to fit in a 2 m deep closet?"
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in the barn. (...) If it does not explode under the strain and it is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be trapped IN A COMPRESSED STATE inside the barn."
http://www.quebecscience.qc.ca/Revolutions
Stéphane Durand: "Ainsi, une fusée de 100 m passant à toute vitesse dans un tunnel de 60 m pourrait être entièrement contenue dans ce tunnel pendant une fraction de seconde, durant laquelle il serait possible de fermer des portes aux deux bouts! La fusée est donc réellement plus courte. Pourtant, il n'y a PAS DE COMPRESSION matérielle ou physique de l'engin."
Pentcho Valev
Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p. 106: "The effect is mutual. Each of us finds the other's lengths in the direction of our relative motion contracted. When FitzGerald and Lorentz and Poincaré spoke of a contraction, they thought of it as arising from motion through the ether. Undoubtedly they silently assumed that someone at rest in the ether would find that moving lengths were contracted but that a moving observer would find that lengths at rest in the ether were expanded compared with his own. And the even greater silence of these scientists about the slowing of clocks shows that in spite of their mathematical equations being the same as Einstein's, the idea of a reciprocal slowing of clocks was foreign to their views."
That is, FitzGerald and Lorentz and Poincaré adhered to a false but still rational physical picture: a unilateral length contraction caused by the interaction of the moving object with the ether. By introducing mutual length contraction and mutual time dilation (idiotic offsprings of his 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate), Einstein actually killed rationality in science. Nowadays Einsteinians gloriously trap unlimitedly long objects inside unlimitedly short containers while singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity":
http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relativity-4engineers.com/images/Ladder_paradox_garage_irf1.png
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQHPAeiiQ3w
"How fast does a 7 m long buick need to go to fit in a 2 m deep closet?"
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/barn_pole.html
"These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in the barn. (...) If it does not explode under the strain and it is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be trapped IN A COMPRESSED STATE inside the barn."
http://www.quebecscience.qc.ca/Revolutions
Stéphane Durand: "Ainsi, une fusée de 100 m passant à toute vitesse dans un tunnel de 60 m pourrait être entièrement contenue dans ce tunnel pendant une fraction de seconde, durant laquelle il serait possible de fermer des portes aux deux bouts! La fusée est donc réellement plus courte. Pourtant, il n'y a PAS DE COMPRESSION matérielle ou physique de l'engin."
Pentcho Valev
0 new messages