How Fatally Einstein Brainwashed Physicists

That the speed of light is variable, not constant, is obvious. When the initially stationary observer starts moving towards the light source with speed v, the frequency he measures shifts from f=c/λ to f'=(c+v)/λ. This means that either the speed of the light relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, in violation of Einstein's relativity, or the motion of the observer somehow changes the wavelength of the incoming light - from λ to λ'=λc/(c+v). The latter scenario is absurd - the motion of the observer is obviously unable to change the wavelength of the incoming light.

Conclusion: The speed of light is different to differently moving observers (varies with the speed of the observer), in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Let us return to the absurd scenario described above. The observer starts moving towards the light source, and suddenly the wavelength of the incoming light (or the distance between subsequent pulses, if the light is so emitted) becomes shorter for him. A miraculous length contraction (which is length elongation if the observer is moving away from the source) not even mentioned in textbooks, despite its crucial importance for the survival of Einstein's relativity. It is so idiotic that scientists often reject it explicitly:

http://physics.ucsd.edu/students/cou...cs2c/Waves.pdf
"Doppler effect (...) Let u be speed of source or observer (...) Doppler Shift: Moving Observer. Shift in frequency only, WAVELENGTH DOES NOT CHANGE. Speed observed = v+u (...) Observed frequency shift f'=f(1±u/v)"

http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teachin...ml/node41.html
"Thus, the moving observer sees a wave possessing THE SAME WAVELENGTH (...) but a different frequency (...) to that seen by the stationary observer."

http://a-levelphysicstutor.com/wav-doppler.php
"vO is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocity is independent of the motion of the source. Hence, the velocity of waves relative to the observer is c + vO. (...) THE MOTION OF AN OBSERVER DOES NOT ALTER THE WAVELENGTH. The increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time."

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "The frequency of a wave-like signal - such as sound or light - depends on the movement of the sender and of the receiver. This is known as the Doppler effect. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source... (...) By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, once more, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiver is somewhat higher than the frequency with which the pulses are sent out. This time, THE DISTANCES BETWEEN SUBSEQUENT PULSES ARE NOT AFFECTED, but still there is a frequency shift: As the receiver moves towards each pulse, the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened. In this particular animation, which has the receiver moving towards the source at one third the speed of the pulses themselves, four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses.."

Can physicists realize that, since the moving observer is unable to change the wavelength of the incoming light, it is the speed of the light relative to him that changes, in violation of Einstein's relativity? No. In their early education physicists are forced to repeat various idiocies until in the end they become creatures equivalent to Bingo the Clowno:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M
Bingo the Clowno

Here is a clear example of the conversion of normal people into thoughtless zombies: Initially Joe Wolfe's students are sure that the speed of light cannot be the same for differently moving observers but in the end all of them get the name Bingo the Einsteiniano:

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einstein...eird_logic.htm
Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morley experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding."

Pentcho Valev

When the initially stationary observer starts moving towards the light source with speed v, the frequency he measures shifts from f = c/λ to f' = (c+v)/λ:

http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/roger/PHY.../lecture18.pdf
"Moving Observer. Now suppose the source is fixed but the observer is moving towards the source, with speed v. In time t, ct/λ waves pass a fixed point. A moving point adds another vt/λ. So f'=(c+v)/λ."

This means that, in the frame of the moving observer, we have either

A: f' = (c+v)/λ ; c' = c+v ; λ' = λ

or

B: f' = (c+v)/λ ; c' = c ; λ' = λc/(c+v).

A is reasonable - it is valid for all kinds of waves. The only problem with A is that it is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory.

B is idiotic - Einsteinians know that and never teach it explicitly. The brainwashed world would never ask how the motion of the observer manages to shift the wavelength of the incoming light from λ to λ' = λc/(c+v).

http://img15.hostingpics.net/pics/86...uletableau.jpg

Pentcho Valev