A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Einstein's 1905 Nonsense That Killed Physics



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 11th 19, 10:45 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's 1905 Nonsense That Killed Physics

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

SEEMS to be nonsense? No. It IS nonsense. Brian Greene presents it quite well:

Brian Greene: What does it mean for the speed of light to be constant? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Irlq3TFr8Q

The speed of light, as measured by Gracy the Receiver (Observer), OBVIOUSLY VARIES with Gracy's speed. Here is Gracy the Receiver running towards George the Emitter:

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ector_blue.gif

(Website: http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler.html)

The speed of the light pulses as measured by George the Emitter is

c = df

where d is the distance between the pulses and f is the frequency measured by George. The speed of the pulses as measured by Gracy the Receiver is

c'= df' c

where f' f is the frequency measured by Gracy.

http://zeondessinateur.files.wordpre...eau..jpg?w=500

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old March 12th 19, 02:19 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's 1905 Nonsense That Killed Physics

Gracy the Receiver starts running towards George the Emitter with speed v:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE

The speed of light as measured by Gracy the Receiver shifts from c to c'=c+v, in violation of Einstein's relativity.

The frequency Gracy the Receiver measures shifts from f=c/λ to f'=c'/λ.

The wavelength is INVARIABLE.

It can be shown that the wavelength is INVARIABLE in two more cases:

1. When George the Emitter, not Gracy the Receiver, is running.

2. When light is falling in a gravitational field.

Future fundamental physics will be the result of a paradigm shift replacing Einstein's nonsensical axiom

"Speed of light is invariable"

with the correct axiom

"Wavelength of light is invariable".

So the formula

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

will mean that any frequency shift entails (is caused by) a speed-of-light shift.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old March 13th 19, 12:29 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's 1905 Nonsense That Killed Physics

The combination of the following two texts is a nightmare for any Einsteinian:

"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

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

The horror comes from the fact that "SEEMS TO BE NONSENSE" is slightly incorrect - the correct words are "IS NONSENSE".

Over the last 3-4 years Einsteinians have been becoming experts in quantum mechanics, AI, biology etc:

https://c6.quickcachr.fotos.sapo.pt/...2108_dBrrH.png

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old March 13th 19, 11:48 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's 1905 Nonsense That Killed Physics

The formula (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) says that a frequency shift entails either a wavelength shift or a speed-of-light shift.

"Any frequency shift entails a wavelength shift" is an implication of Einstein's 1905 axiom "The speed of light is invariable". The implication is obviously absurd - e.g. when the observer (receiver) starts moving towards the light source, the frequency he measures changes but the wavelength (or the distance between the light pulses) remains invariable:

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ector_blue.gif

The absurdity of the implication means that the underlying axiom, "The speed of light is invariable", is false.

"Any frequency shift entails (is caused by) a speed-of-light shift" is an implication of the axiom "The wavelength of light is invariable". This axiom is correct and will be fundamental in future physics. Here is an equivalent formulation:

Any light source emits INVARIABLE wavelength.

Einsteinians teach that the wavelength VARIES with the speed of the light source:

Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", Chapter 3: "Now imagine a source of light at a constant distance from us, such as a star, emitting waves of light at a constant wavelength. Obviously the wavelength of the waves we receive will be the same as the wavelength at which they are emitted (the gravitational field of the galaxy will not be large enough to have a significant effect). Suppose now that the source starts moving toward us. When the source emits the next wave crest it will be nearer to us, so the distance between wave crests will be smaller than when the star was stationary." http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/s...ry_of_time.pdf

The idea that the crests bunch up (the wavelength decreases) in front of the moving source is absurd. We have

wavelength = (speed of light as measured by the source)/(frequency as measured by the source)

where (frequency as measured by the source) is obviously independent of the speed of the source. So if the wavelength varied with the speed of the source, then (speed of light as measured by the source) would vary with the speed of the source as well, which is absurd of course.

See Zoe traveling towards Jasper and measuring the speed of light to be always c:

https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einste...eird_logic.htm

By using the same device, Zoe measures the wavelength and finds that it is INVARIABLE (independent of Zoe's speed). This means that Jasper measures the speed of light to be c'=c+v, not c.

The speed of light is VARIABLE, the wavelength is INVARIABLE:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D0U6R1RXgAEbxnQ.png

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Einstein's Nonsense That Killed Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 February 28th 19 11:38 AM
Einstein's 1905 Nonsense Was Fatal to Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 December 4th 18 03:20 PM
Fundamental Physics Killed by Einstein's 1905 Axiom Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 November 30th 18 11:15 AM
Einstein's Constant-Speed-of-Light Nonsense That Killed Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 February 25th 18 08:47 AM
EINSTEIN'S LIE THAT KILLED PHYSICS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 June 15th 15 09:25 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.