AMUSING USES OF EINSTEIN'S ABSURDITIES

[Pentcho Valev]

http://www.parabola.unsw.edu.au/vol35_no1/vol35_no1_2.pdf
Parabola Volume 35, Issue 1 (1999), LENGTH AND RELATIVITY, John Steele: "In a previous issue issue of Parabola (Vol 29 No 2 p.2), I discussed the effect on time measurement of Einstein's two postulates of Special Relativity. These two postulates are: 1. the laws of Physics are the same to any inertial observer and 2. there is an inertial observer for whom light signals in vacuum travel at a constant speed in all directions whatever the motion of the light source. (...) The Pole in the Barn Paradox. Now we know about length contraction, we can invent some amusing uses of it. Suppose you want to fit a 20m pole into a 10m barn. If the pole were moving fast enough, then length contraction means it would be short enough. (...) Hence in both frames of reference, the pole fits inside the barn (and will presumably shatter when the doors are closed)."

The conclusion that a 20m pole can be trapped inside a 10m barn, or generally that an arbitrarily long object can fit inside an arbitrarily short container, is ABSURD, not amusing. In a world different from Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world the absurdity of the conclusion would entail rejection of a false postulate. In Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world absurdities make people sing:

http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm
DIVINE EINSTEIN: No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bo-o-ohr!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.

Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com

[Pentcho Valev]

The absurd consequences of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate are unbearable even to some Einsteinians:

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257
Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation, p. 250: "Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of containing new quantum gravitational effects."

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-physicists-abolish-fourth-dimension-space.html
"But Sorli and Fiscaletti argue that the length contraction of clock A and subsequent difference in the ticking rates of clocks A and B do not agree with special relativity, which postulates that the speed of light is constant in all inertial reference frames. They say that, keeping the photon speed the same for both clocks, both clocks should tick at the same rate with no length contraction for clock A."

Yet it takes a very clever Einsteinian to reach the fatal conclusion: If there is no length contraction, then the speed of light varies with the speed of the light source as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light:

http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768
Relativity and Its Roots, Banesh Hoffmann: "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether."

Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com

[Pentcho Valev]

Usually Divine Albert's Divine Theory requires that rods contract (so that Einsteinians can gloriously trap them inside much shorter containers) but sometimes the Divine Theory requires that rods stretch beyond their proper length. In the famous bug-rivet paradox the rivet shank should become as long as necessary and mercilessly squash the bug:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Relativ/bugrivet.html
"The bug-rivet paradox is a variation on the twin paradox and is similar to the pole-barn paradox.....The end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall. So it looks like the bug is squashed.....All this is nonsense from the bug's point of view. The rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole! The rivet doesn't get close to the bug....The paradox is not resolved."

http://brianclegg.blogspot.com/2011_11_01_archive.html
Brian Clegg: "Here's the scenario. We've got a table with a 10mm deep hole in it. At the bottom of the hole a beetle is happily beetling about, unaware that we are about to fire a rivet into the hole. The good news is that the shank of the rivet, the bit that will go into the hole, is only 8mm long, leaving room for our (rather small) beetle to feel safe and snug. (...) Let's follow the event from the beetle's viewpoint. Down comes the rivet and slams into the table. At the moment before the impact the rivet is still just 5mm long as far as the bug is concerned. 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. It will then send a counter wave back up the rivet and after a degree of shuddering will eventually settle down as an 8 mm rivet in a 10 mm hole. Too late, though, for that bug. Isn't physics great?"

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."

Length contraction has been unimpressive for a long time - Einsteinians just quietly sing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity". Some don't even sing at all. In contrast, length elongation is always extremely exciting - singing becomes hysterical and the bug's death makes the ecstasy uncontrollable: Einsteinians tumble to the floor, start tearing their clothes and go into convulsions.

Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com