EINSTEINIANA: THE FUNDAMENTAL CAMOUFLAGE
Pentcho Valev
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. Now we might
think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity
and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust.
But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the
special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of
validity; its result hold only so long as we are able to disregard the
influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)."
There is a trivial truth Einstein uses in this case: the speed of
light "varies with position" in a gravitational field but, in the
absence of a gravitational field or in a free-falling laboratory, it
does not vary with position and IN THIS SENSE is constant. However
Einstein knows that in Einstein zombie world constancy in any sense
could easily become constancy in the sense of Einstein's 1905 false
light postulate:
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
"....light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
body."
So Einstein zombie world will never realize that the fact that the
speed of light "varies with position" in a gravitational field implies
that, in the absence of a gravitational field, it does depend on "the
state of motion of the emitting body" and so the 1905 light postulate
is violated. The intimate relationship between Einstein and Einstein
zombie world is nicely expressed by the Cambridge Professor John
Barrow:
http://www.aapps.org/archive/bulletin/vol15/15-5/15_5_p2p3%7F.pdf
John Barrow: "Einstein restored faith in the unintelligibility of
science. Everyone knew that Einstein had done something important in
1905 (and again in 1915) but almost nobody could tell you exactly what
it was. When Einstein was interviewed for a Dutch newspaper in 1921,
he attributed his mass appeal to the mystery of his work for the
ordinary person: "Does it make a silly impression on me, here and
yonder, about my theories of which they cannot understand a word? I
think it is funny and also interesting to observe. I am sure that it
is the mystery of non-understanding that appeals to them...it impresses
them, it has the colour and the appeal of the mysterious."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
Einstein zombie world, could easily become constancy in the sense of
Einstein's 1905 false light postulate:
http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge196.html
George Smoot, Recipient, The 2006 Nobel Prize for Physics: "When I
taught special relativity to my physics students at Berkeley, I
tended, like many of my colleagues, to follow a well-worn path: first,
the Michelson-Morley experiment ("The most important thing that ever
happened in Cleveland"), with its null result on the motion of Earth
through the so-called luminerifous aether (thought to be the medium
carrying light waves) and its demonstration that the speed of light is
constant."
http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/dice.html
Stephen Hawking: "Both Mitchell and Laplace thought of light as
consisting of particles, rather like cannon balls, that could be
slowed down by gravity, and made to fall back on the star. But a
famous experiment, carried out by two Americans, Michelson and Morley
in 1887, showed that light always travelled at a speed of one hundred
and eighty six thousand miles a second, no matter where it came from.
How then could gravity slow down light, and make it fall back."
Compare with:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
xxein
xxein: "So Einstein zombie world will never realize that the fact that
the
speed of light "varies with position" in a gravitational field
implies
that, in the absence of a gravitational field, it does depend on "the
state of motion of the emitting body".
It does not imply that at all. But you are close without realizing
it.
But still 'no'. Lightspeed does not depend on the emitter. It
travels at its speed according to its propagation medium.
Figure that out instead of jumping to false conclusions.
xxein
xxein: Quote me. "Red blankets will certainly suffocate you, whereas
blue blankets cannot".
Pentcho Valev
do with the Original Divine Constancy given by Einstein's 1905 false
light postulate, they boldly violate it, produce shock and horror in
Einstein zombie world, point to a Great Revolution in Science that is
just around the corner and make a lot of profit in terms of career and
money:
http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538
Paul Davies: "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?"
Then Einsteinians quickly return to the classical miraculous
corollaries of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate that constitute
the main money-spinner in Einstein criminal cult:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/davies/davies_index.html
Paul Davies: "Remarkably, Wells's story was written about ten years
before the publication of Einstein's special theory of relativity was
published. Special relativity showed that time is elastic, flexible.
It isn't simply there -- the same for everybody, as Newton supposed.
There's your time and my time, and they can differ depending on how we
move. If I jump in a rocket ship and head off at nearly the speed of
light to a nearby star and come back again ten earth years later, I
may have aged only, say, one year. This is called the twins effect,
because if I left my twin brother at home, when I returned we would no
longer be the same age. He would be ten years older, and I only one
year older. In effect, I will have time-travelled nine years into his
future. Bizarre though this time-stretching effect seems, we know it's
true.....Travel into the past is much more problematic, though. The
significant thing is, our best understanding of the nature of time,
which comes from Einstein's general theory of relativity, leaves open
the possibility of travel into the past. It doesn't say you can't do
it, there's no known law within the theory of relativity to forbid it.
But finding a plausible scenario to actually travel into the past is
not an easy thing......This topic is often cast in the parable of the
grandmother paradox: you go back 50 years and kill your grandmother,
ensuring that you were never born in the first place. One way around
it is that if you go to a parallel world, and kill your parallel
grandmother, you can return to your own time to find Granny still
alive and well. That's a possible resolution. There isn't any
consensus on it. Perhaps the existence of parallel realities is a
worse prospect than that of causal loop paradoxes......Einstein's
theory of relativity tells us that space is curved by gravity, so
imagine that it was warped in such a way that it connected earth with
the center of the galaxy through a tube or a tunnel that might only be
a few kilometers long -- who knows? The point is that if a wormhole is
possible, it can be adapted for use as a time machine, as shown by Kip
Thorne at Caltech, and his colleagues, and now the subject of an
international cottage industry in research papers. To travel in time,
what you do is this. You first plunge through the wormhole and exit at
the remote end, then you zoom back home again through ordinary space
at nearly the speed of light. If the circumstances are right, you can
get back before you leave."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
Pentcho Valev
A light source at the top of a tower of height h emits photons with
speed c (relative to the source). The photons accelerate so that, when
they reach a receiver on the ground, their speed (relative to the
receiver) is
c' = c(1 + gh/c^2) /1/
which is Einstein's 1911 equation. Now a rocket with length h
accelerates with acceleration g. A light source at the front end emits
photons with speed c (relative to the source). When the photons reach
the receiver at the back end, this receiver has a speed v relative to
the light source at the moment of emission. What is the speed of the
photons, c', relative to the receiver, at the moment of reception?
You should only apply Einstein's equivalence principle and see that
gh = cv /2/
Substitute this into /1/ and you obtain
c' = c + v /3/
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
tici viracocha
thanks
but this is body fluids
this is only becus tha fools at that time and
nnow still thinkin that light is partical and balistic
particles are oxymorons, you cant have a zero
size consistent somthin embedded in 3d
you can draw it, but drawings are body fluids
as well, which is for gay
light is not balistic and dont propagate
light is much more than that
fat rats dont understan gravity nor light
Pentcho Valev
When Einsteinians are sure that a particular constancy/variability of
the speed of light has nothing to do with Einstein's 1905 false light
postulate, they become so bold as to use it explicitly in their fights
for supremacy in Einstein criminal cult:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/stringtheory.html
Lee Smolin: "Well, every string theory that's been written down says
the speed of light is universal. But other ideas about quantum gravity
predict the speed of light has actually increased. And an experiment
on the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope, launching next year, will
check this. So I've said, look, if the speed of light isn't universal,
that disconfirms string theory. But the string theorists say they
could probably invent versions of the theory that work either way.
We'd have to change our notion of what science is to accommodate this
proposition. You just can't do science on that basis."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com
NoEinstein
Dear Pentcho: You are one of the most energetic promoters of your
views on science I have ever read. Your problem: You enjoy the
process of arguing "the old things" too much to give them up. Get a
new pair of glasses and read my various posts. I've disproved SR and
GR! So, arguing about earlier explanations of this or that is a waste
of your time, and a disservice to the many naive minds that might try
to follow your reasoning. Step out of your vacuum, fellow! --
NoEinstein -- :-)
xxein
>
> - Show quoted text -
xxein: A mere statement of math does not describe a physic.
"> A light source at the top of a tower of height h emits photons with
> speed c (relative to the source). The photons accelerate so that, when
> they reach a receiver on the ground, their speed (relative to the
> receiver) is
>
> c' = c(1 + gh/c^2)" (if that has physical meaning).
Here you have a "static" case of emission parallel to gravity. The
frequency remains unchanged. The difference in measurement is the
clockrate used to measure the effects.
Your second example only shows that you confuse yourself further.
G. L. Bradford
"Pentcho Valev" <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8e29233e-6bfd-44bd...@a23g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
"If I jump into a rocket ship...."
Give a distance for an example. In light years, please.
Make it ten light years to the star and for the hell of it a round trip of
two years by his ship board clock. What is the traveler's starting point in
time? This year 2008? NO! The year 1998! THE APPROXIMATE TIME WHEN THE LIGHT
LEFT THE DESTINATION STAR TEN LIGHT YEARS FROM SOL! THE CLOCK TIME (CLOCK
DATE) FOR THE DESTINATION STAR THE TRAVELER HAS UNDER OBSERVATION UPON
DEPARTURE FROM VICINITY OF SOL! That is the traveler's starting block in
time and path of his time travel from Sol to the destination star, NOT THE
YEAR 2008!
Time passage to the vicinity of star ten light years away, [observed fast
forwarding all the way by the traveler], eleven years (1998-2009)!
The traveler departs from the vicinity of the star immediately to return
home to Earth. What is the traveler's starting point in time? Sol, 2009? NO!
Sol, 1999! The clock time (clock date) for Sol the traveler has under
observation upon departure from the vicinity of the star.
Time passage to the vicinity of Sol from vicinity of star ten light years
away, [observed fast forwarding all the way by the traveler], eleven years,
(1999-2010)!
Time clocked by his shipboard clock, two years (2008-2010)! Time his twin
brother has for his absence from home, two years (2008-2010)! Time passage
for the duration of the trip the traveling twin observed externally to him,
round trip, twenty-two years (there: 1998-2009)-(return: 1999-2010)! Twenty
light years, round trip.....twenty-two years, round trip (observed as two
historical lines of the "all history universe")....in two years, round trip!
GLB
NoEinstein
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear GLB: When I disproved SR and GR, I also disproved time dilation
and eliminated the possibility of TIME travel. But I have also
REMOVED Einstein's speed limit of 'c'. Man should be able to travel
to distant stars at several times velocity 'c', without risk of
running into anything. That's because laser light will travel faster
than the spaceship, and that will allow plenty of time to detect
objects, or blast them out of the way. -- NoEinstein --
Pentcho Valev
> On Mar 24, 3:12 am, xxein <xx...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
> which is Einstein's 1911 equation. Now a rocket with length h
> accelerates with acceleration g. A light source at the front end emits
> photons with speed c (relative to the source). When the photons reach
> the receiver at the back end, this receiver has a speed v relative to
> the light source at the moment of emission. What is the speed of the
> photons, c', relative to the receiver, at the moment of reception?
>
> You should only apply Einstein's equivalence principle and see that
>
> gh = cv /2/
>
> Substitute this into /1/ and you obtain
>
> c' = c + v /3/
Some support coming from Einsteinians:
http://admin.wadsworth.com/resource_uploads/static_resources/0534493394/4891/Ch01-Essay.pdf
Clifford Will: "Gravitational Redshift Another consequence of
Einstein's insight is the gravitational redshift effect, which is a
frequency shift between two identical clocks placed at different
heights in a gravitational field. For small differences in height h
between clocks, the shift in the frequency Df is given by (Df/f=gh/
c^2) where g is the local gravitational acceleration and c is the
speed of light."
http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp "The first confirmation of a
long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in
1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a
previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the
speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational
field....Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated:"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."......Today we find that since the Special
Theory of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called
mainstream science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that
the speed of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT FACTOR."
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com