View Single Post
  #1  
Old March 2nd 13, 07:49 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Special Relativity's Days Are Numbered Aren't They?

A decade ago Joao Magueijo and Lee Smolin discovered that Einstein's special relativity is "the root of all the evil" in physics and that the ultimate culprit is Einstein's 1905 false light postulate:

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, 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://www.amazon.com/Trouble-Physic.../dp/0618551050
Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next, p. 226: "Einstein's special theory of relativity is based on two postulates: One is the relativity of motion, and the second is the constancy and universality of the speed of light. Could the first postulate be true and the other false? If that was not possible, Einstein would not have had to make two postulates. But I don't think many people realized until recently that you could have a consistent theory in which you changed only the second postulate."

Smolin is still fighting special relativity but apparently without questioning the postulates anymore. He has restored the sane Newtonian concept of time at the expense of spoiling the concept of space - at least the article quoted below suggests so:

http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/03...3fP/story.html
"Time doesn't exist? Across great distances, there is no such thing as innately simul*taneous events, such as turning off the stars at once, *except as events communicate with each other slowly across space, at the speed of light. Moreover, different observers experience things happening in different time order, depending on the observer's own velocity. Time itself proved to depend on your viewpoint. It was a hard idea to swallow. A lot of people in the early 1900s thought that relativity would spell the death of certainty, science, morals, and every*thing else. Worse was to come. In discovering the interrelationship of space with time, Einstein found no place left for the queer, indefinable thing called "the present." He was stuck with a picture of the universe as a permanent, eternal, changeless block of four-dimensional "spacetime," with past, present, and future all there at once, in a static, changeless whole. Picture a book, in which the story is all there at once from start to finish. Or a DVD sitting on a shelf, containing the whole movie. This is for real. Modern physics can locate no such thing as "the present." The book of time is not open to a particular page that some unseen mechanism is turning. The DVD on the shelf is just a DVD; it has no laser readout gizmo playing a particular part of the movie right now. No readout device exists. So science is utterly stymied by a simple question: Why do we think it's March 2013 right now, instead of, say, August 2005? What makes one of those two feel immediate to us, and the other not? Some physicists have decided that they must accept the block-universe picture at face value; that the flowing present is some kind of illusion of the human brain, and that all cosmic history exists at once, eternal. Einstein saw no way around it. He urged friends to find comfort in this realization when their loved ones died. Now this idea is coming *under a serious challenge from today's physics frontier. Theorist Lee Smolin at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics argues, in a book to be published next month titled Time Reborn, that the passage of time is the actual fundamental reality, and that physics' picture of invariant space is the thing that needs to turn weird *instead."

Note that special relativity's absurd concept of time "is coming *under a serious challenge from today's physics frontier". Special relativity's days are numbered aren't they?

Pentcho Valev