On Apr 13, 12:55*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Fundamental dishonesty: Einstein deduces the gravitational time
dilation from the Lorentz transformation:

http://www.bartleby.com/173/a3.html
Albert Einstein: "If v0 represents the number of ticks of the clock
per unit time ("rate" of the clock) relative to K when the clock is at
rest, then the "rate" of the clock (v) when it is moving relative to K
with a velocity v, but at rest with respect to the disc, will, IN
ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION XII, be given by... (...) In the first place,
we see from this expression that two clocks of identical construction
will go at different rates when situated at different distances from
the centre of the disc. This result is also valid from the standpoint
of an observer who is rotating with the disc. Now, as judged from the
disc, the latter is in a gravitational field of potential [phi], hence
the result we have obtained will hold quite generally for
gravitational fields. Furthermore, we can regard an atom which is
emitting spectral lines as a clock..."

Einsteiniana's priests fiercely teach the gravitational time dilation
but never deduce it from the Lorentz transformation:

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
Chapter 14 (http://student.fizika.org/~jsisko/Kn...anika/David%20...
David Morin: "The equivalence principle has a striking consequence
concerning the behavior of clocks in a gravitational field. It implies
that higher clocks run faster than lower clocks. If you put a watch on
top of a tower, and then stand on the ground, you will see the watch
on the tower tick faster than an identical watch on your wrist. When
you take the watch down and compare it to the one on your wrist, it
will show more time elapsed."

http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168
Stephen Hawking: "Another prediction of general relativity is that
time should appear to slower near a massive body like the earth. This
is because there is a relation between the energy of light and its
frequency (that is, the number of waves of light per second): the
greater the energy, the higher frequency. As light travels upward in
the earths gravitational field, it loses energy, and so its frequency
goes down. (This means that the length of time between one wave crest
and the next goes up.) To someone high up, it would appear that
everything down below was making longer to happen. This prediction was
tested in 1962, using a pair of very accurate clocks mounted at the
top and bottom of a water tower. The clock at the bottom, which was
nearer the earth, was found to run slower, in exact agreement with
general relativity."

The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Volume 2, Chapter 42-6:
Richard Feynman: "Suppose we put a clock at the "head" of the rocket
ship - that is, at the front end - and we put another identical clock
at the "tail," as in fig. 42-16. Let's call the two clocks A and B. If
we compare these two clocks when the ship is accelerating, the clock
at the head seems to run fast relative to the one at the tail. To see
that, imagine that the front clock emits a flash of light each second,
and that you are sitting at the tail comparing the arival of the light
flashes with the ticks of clock B. (...) The first flash travels the
distance L1 and the second flash travels the shorter distance L2. It
is a shorter distance because the ship is acelerating and has a higher
speed at the time of the second flash. You can see, then, that if the
two flashes were emitted from clock A one second apart, they would
arrive at clock B with a separation somewhat less than one second,
since the second flash doesn't spend as much time on the way."

http://www-cosmosaf.iap.fr/RELATIVIT...20Thibault.htm
Thibault Damour: "D'un point de vue plus général, puisque la fréquence
d'une raie spectrale définit une "horloge" à l'échelle atomique, le
principe d'équivalence prédit l'existence d'une dilatation
gravitationnelle des durées lors de la comparaison de deux horloges
situées à des niveaux de potentiel gravitationnel différents."

http://www.liberation.fr/sciences/01...uete-des-temps
Etienne Klein: "Mais pour la relativité générale d'Einstein, l'espace
et le temps sont déformés par les objets qu'ils contiennent. Ainsi le
temps ne s'écoule pas de la même façon au voisinage d'une étoile très
dense qu'à proximité d'une planète."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/01/op...hought-we-knew...
Brian Greene: "In the early part of the 20th century, however, Albert
Einstein saw through nature's Newtonian facade and revealed that the
passage of time depends on circumstance and environment. He showed
that the wris****ches worn by two individuals moving relative to one
another, or experiencing different gravitational fields, tick off time
at different rates. The passage of time, according to Einstein, is in
the eye of the beholder. (...) Rudolf Carnap, the philosopher,
recounts Einstein's telling him that ''the experience of the now means
something special for man, something essentially different from the
past and the future, but this important difference does not and cannot
occur within physics.'' And later, in a condolence letter to the widow
of Michele Besso, his longtime friend and fellow physicist, Einstein
wrote: ''In quitting this strange world he has once again preceded me
by just a little. That doesn't mean anything. For we convinced
physicists the distinction between past, present, and future is only
an illusion, however persistent.'' (...) Now, however, modern physics'
notion of time is clearly at odds with the one most of us have
internalized. Einstein greeted the failure of science to confirm the
familiar experience of time with ''painful but inevitable
resignation.'' The developments since his era have only widened the
disparity between common experience and scientific knowledge. Most
physicists cope with this disparity by compartmentalizing: there's
time as understood scientifically, and then there's time as
experienced intuitively. For decades, I've struggled to bring my
experience closer to my understanding. In my everyday routines, I
delight in what I know is the individual's power, however
imperceptible, to affect time's passage. In my mind's eye, I often
conjure a kaleidoscopic image of time in which, with every step, I
further fracture Newton's pristine and uniform conception. And in
moments of loss I've taken comfort from the knowledge that all events
exist eternally in the expanse of space and time, with the partition
into past, present and future being a useful but subjective
organization."

Yet Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's apostle, admits (driven by
doublethink) that the gravitational time dilation is not real. He even
hints at a well known (but extremely dangerous for Einsteinana) fact:
the gravitational redshift arises from the acceleration of photons in
a gravitational field, identical to the acceleration experienced by
cannonballs, in accordance with the formula:

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) :

http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its.../dp/0486406768
Banesh Hoffmann: "In an accelerated sky laboratory, and therefore also
in the corresponding earth laboratory, the frequence of arrival of
light pulses is lower than the ticking rate of the upper clocks EVEN
THOUGH ALL THE CLOCKS GO AT THE SAME RATE. (...) As a result the
experimenter at the ceiling of the sky laboratory will see with his
own eyes that the floor clock is going at a slower rate than the
ceiling clock - EVEN THOUGH, AS I HAVE STRESSED, BOTH ARE GOING AT THE
SAME RATE. (...) THE GRAVITATIONAL RED SHIFT DOES NOT ARISE FROM
CHANGES IN THE INTRINSIC RATES OF CLOCKS. IT ARISES FROM WHAT BEFALLS
LIGHT SIGNALS AS THEY TRAVERSE SPACE AND TIME IN THE PRESENCE OF
GRAVITATION."

http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen
George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two
contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both
of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories
must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with
reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself
that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it
would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to
be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and
hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since
the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while
retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To
tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any
fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary
again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed,
to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take
account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably
necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to
exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is
tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this
knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead
of the truth. (...) It need hardly be said that the subtlest
practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and
know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society,
those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those
who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the
greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more
intelligent, the less sane."

Pentcho Valev


It's the hallmark of the unintelligent to keep repeating the same
argument ignoring all feedback from constructive criticizers.