![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/...relativity.htm
Updated 2014 by Don Koks. Original by Steve Carlip (1997) and Philip Gibbs 1996: "To state that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the observer is very counterintuitive. Some people even refuse to accept this as a logically consistent possibility, but in 1905 Einstein was able to show that it is perfectly consistent if you are prepared to give up assumptions about the absolute nature of space and time." http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic..._of_light.html So Einstein "wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair", but in the end found it profitable to introduce the nonsense. However the nonsense naturally proved inconsistent with the non-nonsensical concepts of space and time, and Einstein restored consistency by converting space and time, too, into nonsense (insanity is often internally consistent): "Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime." http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/20...rs-of-gravity/ http://negrjp.fotoblog.uol.com.br/im...0819051851.jpg Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Einstein embraces "bizarreness" and kills physics:
Robert Scherrer, Professor and Chair of Physics and Astronomy at Vanderbilt University: "When scientists developed the theory of light back in the 19th century, it came with a special puzzle: their theory seemed to show that every observer should measure the same speed for light, about 186,000 miles per second. But that means if you try to chase a beam of light, no matter how fast you move, the light beam will still fly away from you at 186,000 miles per second. [...] Instead of trying to explain away this bizarreness, Albert Einstein embraced it." http://theconversation.com/faster-th...here-yet-41112 No theory of light in the 19th century had said that "every observer should measure the same speed for light"; rather, existing theories - Maxwell's, Newton's - had established that differently moving observers measure different speeds of light. And the Michelson-Morley experiment had unequivocally proved that the speed of light is variable, not constant. The "bizarreness" (more precisely, idiocy) was Einstein's own fabrication, and he wrestled with his conscience "over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair" before introducing it: John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair."x http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/...relativity.htm In the end Einstein embraced the "bizarreness" and killed physics: "The speaker Joao Magueijo, is a Reader in Theoretical Physics at Imperial College, London and author of Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation. He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html "...Dr. Magueijo said. "We need to drop a postulate, perhaps the constancy of the speed of light." http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/31/sc...-relative.html "But the researchers said they spent a lot of time working on a theory that wouldn't destabilise our understanding of physics. "The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light," Joao Magueijo told Motherboard. "So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...ht-discovered/ 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/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257 Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair."o http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/...relativity.htm
This nonsense represents the first heavy blow on physics students's rationality: 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." http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einstein...eird_logic.htm Then Joe Wolfe and other brainwashers will continue to talk nonsense, loudly and repeatedly - in the end students will become indistinguishable from Bingo the Clowno: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M Bingo the Clowno Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Big Brother's 2+2=5 and Einstein's Constant Speed of Light | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 2 | May 10th 17 06:57 AM |
How Einstein Fabricated the Constant Speed of Light | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 2 | October 31st 16 09:03 AM |
WHY EINSTEIN POSTULATED CONSTANT SPEED OF LIGHT | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | November 9th 15 08:00 AM |
EINSTEIN AND THE CONSTANT SPEED OF LIGHT | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 1 | January 22nd 15 08:39 PM |
WHY EINSTEIN RETAINED THE CONSTANT SPEED OF LIGHT | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | August 30th 14 07:18 PM |