WORLD SCIENCE FESTIVAL : INTENSE BRAINWASHING

[Pentcho Valev]

Intense brainwashing has just started in Einstein's schizophrenic world:

http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/programs/light-falls-space-time-obsession-einstein/
PARTICIPANTS: Brian Greene, Jessica Frey, Carl Howell, Michael Winther DATE: Wednesday, May 27, 2015: "Celebrating the 100th anniversary of Einstein's discovery of the general theory of relativity, this original work weaves together dramatic portrayals, state-of-the-art animation and innovative projection techniques to trace Einstein's electrifying journey toward one of the most beautiful ideas ever conceived. Join Brian Greene and an ensemble cast for the dramatic story of the breakthrough moments, near misses, agonizing frustrations, and emergence into the light, as one intrepid mind took on the universe ... and won."

Will Brian Greene & Co inform the audience that the speed of light is variable, and that the Pound-Rebka experiment has confirmed the variation predicted by Newton's emission theory of light? Of course not:

https://archive.org/stream/EinsteinRelativityHappiestThought/EinsteinRelativityHappiestThought_djvu.txt
Albert Einstein: "Second, this consequence shows that the law of the constancy of the speed of light no longer holds, according to the general theory of relativity, in spaces that have gravitational fields. As a simple geometric consideration shows, the curvature of light rays occurs only in spaces where the speed of light is spatially variable."

http://bartleby.net/173/22.html
Albert Einstein: "In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position."

http://sethi.lamar.edu/bahrim-cristian/Courses/PHYS4480/4480-PROBLEMS/optics-gravit-lens_PPT.pdf
Cristian Bahrim: "If we accept the principle of equivalence, we must also accept that light falls in a gravitational field with the same acceleration as material bodies."

http://www.wfu.edu/~brehme/space.htm
Robert W. Brehme: "Light falls in a gravitational field just as do material objects."

http://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys419/sp2013/Lectures/l13.pdf
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: "Consider a falling object. ITS SPEED INCREASES AS IT IS FALLING. Hence, if we were to associate a frequency with that object the frequency should increase accordingly as it falls to earth. Because of the equivalence between gravitational and inertial mass, WE SHOULD OBSERVE THE SAME EFFECT FOR LIGHT. So lets shine a light beam from the top of a very tall building. If we can measure the frequency shift as the light beam descends the building, we should be able to discern how gravity affects a falling light beam. This was done by Pound and Rebka in 1960. They shone a light from the top of the Jefferson tower at Harvard and measured the frequency shift. The frequency shift was tiny but in agreement with the theoretical prediction. Consider a light beam that is travelling away from a gravitational field. Its frequency should shift to lower values. This is known as the gravitational red shift of light."

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/redshift_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."

Pentcho Valev

[Pentcho Valev]

The World Science Festival's boss, Brian Greene, brainwashes the world:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3MymDSzKZ0
World Science Festival: A Moment of Science with Brian Greene: Moving Clocks Tick Off Time Slowly

Here is my comment to the video (Greene diligently deletes my comments but this one has somehow survived):

"Moving Clocks Tick Off Time Slowly". This is not a conclusion that validly follows from Einstein's 1905 postulates. The valid conclusion is:

Moving clocks tick off time slowly, as judged from the stationary system.

Another valid conclusion is:

Stationary clocks tick off time slowly, as judged from the moving system.

So the twin paradox is actually an absurdity - it follows from the postulates of Einstein's special relativity that, at the end of the travelling twin's journey, either twin finds his brother younger than himself. The turn-around acceleration is immaterial, as clever scientists explain:

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/archive/archive_2014/today14-05-02_NutshellReadMore.html
Don Lincoln: "Some readers, probably including some of my doctoral-holding colleagues at Fermilab, will claim that the difference between the two twins is that one of the two has experienced an acceleration. (After all, that's how he slowed down and reversed direction.) However, the relativistic equations don't include that acceleration phase; they include just the coasting time at high velocity."

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/members/gibbons/gwgPartI_SpecialRelativity2010.pdf
Gary W. Gibbons FRS: "In other words, by simply staying at home Jack has aged relative to Jill. There is no paradox because the lives of the twins are not strictly symmetrical. This might lead one to suspect that the accelerations suffered by Jill might be responsible for the effect. However this is simply not plausible because using identical accelerating phases of her trip, she could have travelled twice as far. This would give twice the amount of time gained."

Pentcho Valev

[Pentcho Valev]

http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/30/science/30scifest/30scifest-master675.jpg

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/31/science/world-science-festival-finds-success-in-physics-and-more-as-spectacle.html
"Brian Greene grasps a beam of light. He freezes in an electrified rock-star pose, and as a live orchestra begins to hum, the beam of light slips through his fingertips and flashes across the stage. It's opening night at the eighth annual World Science Festival in New York City, and Dr. Greene is explaining - no, telling the story behind - Einstein's theory of relativity to a sold-out audience. To Dr. Greene, a Columbia string theorist who is a founder of the festival, these concepts are certainly the stuff of numbers and equations. But onstage, in the Gerald W. Lynch Theater at John Jay College in Manhattan, Einstein's speed-of-light calculations are cloaked in music and drama, told by live actors and carefully choreographed to digital animations projected onto a screen."

http://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/2013/02/the-farce-of-physics-2/
The Farce of Physics, Bryan Wallace: "There is a popular argument that the world's oldest profession is sexual prostitution. I think that it is far more likely that the oldest profession is scientific prostitution, and that it is still alive and well, and thriving in the 20th century. I suspect that long before sex had any commercial value, the prehistoric shamans used their primitive knowledge to acquire status, wealth, and political power, in much the same way as the dominant scientific and religious politicians of our time do. (...) Because many of the dominant theories of our time do not follow the rules of science, they should more properly be labeled pseudoscience. The people who tend to believe more in theories than in the scientific method of testing theories, and who ignore the evidence against the theories they believe in, should be considered pseudoscientists and not true scientists. To the extent that the professed beliefs are based on the desire for status, wealth, or political reasons, these people are scientific prostitutes. (...) Einstein's special relativity theory with his second postulate that the speed of light in space is constant is the linchpin that holds the whole range of modern physics theories together. Shatter this postulate, and modern physics becomes an elaborate farce! (...) The speed of light is c+v. (...) I expect that the scientists of the future will consider the dominant abstract physics theories of our time in much the same light as we now consider the Medieval theories of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin or that the Earth stands still and the Universe moves around it."

Note: Bryan Wallace wrote "The Farce of Physics" on his deathbed so one can find stylistic imperfections, undeveloped ideas etc.

See also:

http://sciliterature.50webs.com/SpecLetters1969-p361-367.pdf
Radar Testing of the Relative Velocity of Light in Space, Bryan G. Wallace, Spectroscopy Letters, 1969, pp. 361-367. ABSTRACT: "Published interplanetary radar data presents evidence that the relative velocity of light in space is c+v and not c." INTRODUCTION: "There are three main theories about the relativity velocity of light in space. The Newtonian corpuscular theory is relativistic in the Galilean sense and postulates that the velocity is c+v relative to the observer. The ether theory postulates that the velocity is c relative to the ether. The Einstein theory postulates that the velocity is c relative to the observer. The Michelson-Morley experiment presents evidence against the ether theory and for the c+v theory. The c theory explains the results of this experiment by postulating ad hoc properties of space and time..."

Brian Greene is a superstar; Bryan Wallace is an unperson in Einstein's schizophrenic world:

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.4.html
George Orwell: "Withers, however, was already an unperson. He did not exist : he had never existed."

Pentcho Valev