EINSTEIN TOPPLED BY MOVING OBSERVER
Pentcho Valev
John Norton: "If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the
light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the
resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the
frequency of the light to have increased (and correspondingly for the
wavelength--the distance between crests--to have decreased). That
increase in frequency is a shifting of the light towards the blue end
of the spectrum. The converse effect would happen if the observer were
to recede from the light source. The light's frequency would diminish
and the light would redden. For light, this effect depends only on the
relative motion of observer and source. So if the observer were at
rest and the light source moved, exactly the same thing would happen."
John Norton would have produced a revolutionary text if he had not
used the variable wavelength camouflage. Here is the text without the
camouflage:
"If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the
observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting
observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the
frequency of the light to have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE
SPEED OF THE LIGHT RELATIVE TO HIM TO HAVE INCREASED AS WELL). That
increase in frequency is a shifting of the light towards the blue end
of the spectrum. The converse effect would happen if the observer were
to recede from the light source. The light's frequency would diminish
and the light would redden. For light, this effect depends only on the
relative motion of observer and source. So if the observer were at
rest and the light source moved, exactly the same thing would
happen."
Etherists do not use the variable wavelength camouflage and
accordingly do produce revolutionary texts from time to time:
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V17NO1PDF/V17N1GIF.pdf
Doppler Shift Reveals Light Speed Variation
Stephan J. G. Gift
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
The University of the West Indies
"Therefore the observed Doppler Shift or frequency change in the light
or other electromagnetic radiation resulting from movement of the
receiver toward the transmitter indicates a change in light speed
relative to the moving receiver. (...) In conclusion, a change in
radiation frequency or Doppler Shift occurs when an observer moving at
speed v much lower than c towards or away from a stationary source
intercepts electromagnetic waves from that source. This frequency
change arises because the observer intercepts the electromagnetic
radiation at a relative speed c ± v that is different from the light
speed c. Though special relativity predicts the Doppler Shift, this
light speed variation c ± v occurring in this situation directly
contradicts the light speed invariance requirement of special
relativity."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
George Orwell "1984": "In the end the Party would announce that two
and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable
that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their
position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the
very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their
philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was
terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise,
but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two
and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the
past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist
only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"
In Big Brother's schizophrenic world you are free to replace the
theory predicting that 2+2=5 with a new theory predicting that, say,
2+2=17. However you are not allowed to return to the old theory
predicting that 2+2=4. That would be a crime against the civilization.
Similarly, in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world you are not allowed
to denounce Einstein's 1905 false light postulate (c'=c) and return to
its true alternative given by Newton's emission theory of light - the
equation c'=c+v showing how the speed of light varies with the speed
of the emitter. Our decaying civilization may not be able to withstand
such a blow:
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
Bryan Wallace: "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."
But you are free to try to replace Einstein's "theory" with an
equivalent or even greater idiocy - that would additionally confuse
scientists' minds and so would strengthen Einsteiniana:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-lanza/spiritual-living_b_650940.html
"Did Einstein Set Science Back 100 Years? (...) Einstein's treatment
of space and time as physical objects imparts a completely wrong
starting point for investigations into the nature of reality. (...)
Relativity and biocentrism both predict the same phenomena. It's not
possible to choose one theory over the other based on experiments.
"One must choose relativity over the compensatory [biocentric]
alternatives," wrote Sklar, a leading philosopher of science "as a
matter of free choice." But with biocentrism, there's no need to
invent new dimensions and an entirely new mathematics to explain why
space and time are relative to the observer. (...) Science needs to
restore space and time to their rightful place. They belong to us, not
to the physical world."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Jacko
the speed of light is not constant but is still a measured invariant.
That's why it's m/s and not dimensionless.
BURT
When lightening strikes the train moves down the tracks.
Mitch Raemsch
Bob Myers
So what happens to the train when darkening strikes?
Bob M.
BURT
It turns on the lamp.
Mitch Raemsch
Pentcho Valev
the speed of the observer and the speed of the emitter. True and
consistent with the particle model of light.
Maxwell's theory: The speed of light varies with the speed of the
observer but is independent of the speed of the emitter. A false but
physically reasonable hypothesis: it is consistent with the wave model
of light.
Einstein's special relativity: The speed of light is independent of
both the speed of the observer and the speed of the emitter. A
physically absurd hypothesis: it is inconsistent with both the
particle and wave models of light.
Newton's emission theory of light: The speed of light varies with the
gravitational potential, V, in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+V/
c^2). True and consistent with the particle model of light. Consistent
with the gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 experimentally
confirmed by Pound and Rebka.
Einstein's relativity: Between 1907 and 1915, the speed of light
varies with the gravitational potential, V, in accordance with the
equation c'=c(1+V/c^2) given by Newton's emission theory of light.
From 1915 on, it varies in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+2V/
c^2). Later writers (Stephen Hawking, Steve Carlip) teach that the
speed of light does not vary at all with the gravitational potential.
An inconsistency extremely dangerous for the integrity of scientists'
minds.
Bob Myers
> Newton's emission theory of light: The speed of light varies with both
> the speed of the observer and the speed of the emitter. True and
> consistent with the particle model of light.
Too bad that this "true" theory doesn't hold up to the simplest of
experiments, isn't it?
>
> Einstein's special relativity: The speed of light is independent of
> both the speed of the observer and the speed of the emitter. A
> physically absurd hypothesis: it is inconsistent with both the
> particle and wave models of light.
And being consistent with observation counts for nothing in your
universe, huh? That's....umm....interesting.
Bob M.
Pentcho Valev
energy dependent, frequency dependent, time dependent, even time-space
dependent, but claiming that Einstein's 1905 light postulate:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES
By A. Einstein, June 30, 1905
"...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body."
is false (that is, claiming that the speed of light depends on the
speed of the emitting body) is a crime against the civilization:
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538
Paul Davies: "Was Einstein wrong? Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is
the only scientific formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here
stands for the speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of
the basic constants of physics. Or is it? In recent years a few
maverick scientists have claimed that the speed of light might not be
constant at all. Shock, horror! Does this mean the next Great
Revolution in Science is just around the corner?"
http://www.fqxi.org/data/articles/Searching_for_the_Golden_Spike.pdf
"Loop quantum gravity also makes the heretical prediction that the
speed of light depends on its frequency. That prediction violates
special relativity, Einstein's rule that light in a vacuum travels at
a constant speed for all observers..."
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin03/smolin03_print.html
Lee Smolin: "Now, here is the really interesting part: Some of the
effects predicted by the theory appear to be in conflict with one of
the principles of Einstein's special theory of relativity, the theory
that says that the speed of light is a universal constant. It's the
same for all photons, and it is independent of the motion of the
sender or observer. How is this possible, if that theory is itself
based on the principles of relativity? The principle of the constancy
of the speed of light is part of special relativity, but we quantized
Einstein's general theory of relativity.....But there is another
possibility. This is that the principle of relativity is preserved,
but Einstein's special theory of relativity requires modification so
as to allow photons to have a speed that depends on energy. The most
shocking thing I have learned in the last year is that this is a real
possibility. A photon can have an energy-dependent speed without
violating the principle of relativity! This was understood a few years
ago by Amelino Camelia. I got involved in this issue through work I
did with Joao Magueijo, a very talented young cosmologist at Imperial
College, London. During the two years I spent working there, Joao kept
coming to me and bugging me with this problem.....These ideas all
seemed crazy to me, and for a long time I didn't get it. I was sure it
was wrong! But Joao kept bugging me and slowly I realized that they
had a point. We have since written several papers together showing how
Einstein's postulates may be modified to give a new version of special
relativity in which the speed of light can depend on energy."
http://roychristopher.com/joao-magueijo-frontier-cosmology
"Likewise, Joao Magueijo has radical ideas, but his ideas intend to
turn that Einsteinian dogma on its head. Marueijo is trying to pick
apart one of Einstein's most impenetrable tenets, the constancy of the
speed of light. This idea of a constant speed (about 3×106 meters/
second) is familiar to anyone who is remotely acquainted with modern
physics. It is known as the universal speed limit. Nothing can, has,
or ever will travel faster than light. Magueijo doesnt buy it. His VSL
(Varying Speed of Light) presupposes a speed of light that can be
energy or time-space dependent. Before you declare that he's out of
his mind, understand that this man received his doctorate from
Cambridge, has been a faculty member at Princeton and Cambridge, and
is currently a professor at Imperial College, London. He's a
MAINSTREAM SCIENTIST WHOSE MIND IS BEGINNING TO WANDER."
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E7D8143FF932A05751C1A9649C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
"As propounded by Einstein as an audaciously confident young patent
clerk in 1905, relativity declares that the laws of physics, and in
particular the speed of light -- 186,000 miles per second -- are the
same no matter where you are or how fast you are moving. Generations
of students and philosophers have struggled with the paradoxical
consequences of Einstein's deceptively simple notion, which underlies
all of modern physics and technology, wrestling with clocks that speed
up and slow down, yardsticks that contract and expand and bad jokes
using the word ''relative.''......''Perhaps relativity is too
restrictive for what we need in quantum gravity,'' Dr. Magueijo said.
''We need to drop a postulate, perhaps the constancy of the speed of
light.''
Inertial
news:805bc995-fbee-45a7...@w30g2000yqw.googlegroups.com...
>
>In Einsteiniana you are allowed to claim that the speed of light is
>energy dependent, frequency dependent, time dependent, even time-space
>dependent, but claiming that Einstein's 1905 light postulate:
Nope. its fixed at c thru any point in spacetime. rest of lies snipped
Pentcho Valev
crumble - even olympian deities found it profitable to move in that
direction:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
September 09, 2001
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist. "It is becoming increasingly likely that the
rules we had thought were fundamental through time and space are
actually just bylaws for our bit of it," said Rees, whose new book,
Our Cosmic Habitat, is published next month. "Creation is emerging as
even stranger than we thought." Among the ideas facing revision is
Einstein's belief that the speed of light must always be the same -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."
Eventually systematic exercises in crimestop put an end to the heresy
and Einstein's 1905 false light postulate was saved:
http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17.html#seventeen
George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as
though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It
includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive
logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are
inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of
thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction.
Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity."
Brad Guth
> http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/ind...
With this topic, you're only going to attract mostly rednecks and Jews
that never allow an honest revision of anything, and since it's
impossible;e to change the past, it's equally impossible to change the
future.
According to Einsteinism, while at his ultimate velocity of 'c' (which
is actually kinda slow) a radio transmitted signal would always get to
wherever it was intended, because his photons always exist at the
exact same time and place regardless of their to/from velocity and/or
vector of the transmitter (only their received frequency would be
altered).
In other words, a microwave frequency of 10 GHz as directed at us from
a galaxy 14 billion light years distant and moving away from us at
0.9'c', would be received by us at the frequency of 1 GHz, and if it
were otherwise moving towards us at 0.9'c' would be received as 100
GHz, as well as each supposedly detected at the exact same time as if
having been moving away or toward us at 0.9'c'.
In further review, an expanding universe that's supposedly still
growing its radii at the rate of 'c' has only 0 Hz photons from its
outer most shell or event horizon for us to detect. Unfortunately,
bigger and better telescopes do not seem to support this kind of 0 Hz
Einsteinism. Either that or this universe has gotten way bigger than
anyone can imagine.
~ BG