A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

Post-Sanity Logic in Fundamental Physics



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 21st 19, 04:19 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,492
Default Post-Sanity Logic in Fundamental Physics

Dave Slaven: "Einstein's first postulate seems perfectly reasonable. And his second postulate follows very reasonably from his first. How strange that the consequences will seem so unreasonable." http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/P...lativity3.html

Does Einstein's second, constant-speed-of-light postulate follow "very reasonably" from the first, the principle of relativity? If it does, the constancy of the speed of light is as true as the principle of relativity, in accordance with one of the principles of deduction, and Einstein's relativity is invincible. Here is the syllogism:

Premise 1: The laws of physics are the same in every inertial frame (principle of relativity).

Premise 2: Einstein said that the speed of light is a law of physics.

Conclusion: The speed of light is the same in every inertial frame.

Leonard Susskind: "The principle of relativity is that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame. That principle existed before Einstein. Einstein added one law of physics - the law of physics is that the speed of light is the speed of light, c. If you combine the two things together - that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and that it's a law of physics that light moves with certain velocity, you come to the conclusion that light must move with the same velocity in every reference frame. Why? Because the principle of relativity says that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and Einstein announced that it is a law of physics that light moves with a certain velocity." https://youtu.be/toGH5BdgRZ4?t=626

Pentcho Valev
Ads
  #2  
Old October 21st 19, 06:27 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,492
Default Post-Sanity Logic in Fundamental Physics

The speed of light is OBVIOUSLY variable so extraordinary brainwashing is needed to convince the world that it is constant. If the world can be misled into believing that the constancy of the speed of light is a deductive consequence of the principle of relativity, the danger is removed and the theory is saved - logic forbids the combination "true premise, false consequence".

Einstein, Feynman and Hawking did manage to mislead the gullible world:

Albert Einstein: "If a ray of light be sent along the embankment, we see from the above that the tip of the ray will be transmitted with the velocity c relative to the embankment. Now let us suppose that our railway carriage is again travelling along the railway lines with the velocity v, and that its direction is the same as that of the ray of light, but its velocity of course much less. Let us inquire about the velocity of propagation of the ray of light relative to the carriage. It is obvious that we can here apply the consideration of the previous section, since the ray of light plays the part of the man walking along relatively to the carriage. The velocity W of the man relative to the embankment is here replaced by the velocity of light relative to the embankment. w is the required velocity of light with respect to the carriage, and we have w = c - v. The velocity of propagation of a ray of light relative to the carriage thus comes out smaller than c. But this result comes into conflict with the principle of relativity set forth in Section V." http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html

Albert Einstein, On the Principle of Relativity: "After all, when a beam of light travels with a stated velocity relative to one observer, then - so it seems - a second observer who is himself traveling in the direction of the propagation of the light beam should find the light beam propagating at a lesser velocity than the first observer does. If this were really true, then the law of light propagation in vacuum would not be the same for two observers who are in relative, uniform motion to each other - in contradiction to the principle of relativity stated above." https://einsteinpapers.press.princet.../vol6-trans/16

Richard Feynman: "Suppose we are riding in a car that is going at a speed u, and light from the rear is going past the car with speed c. Differentiating the first equation in (15.2) gives dx'/dt=dx/dt-u, which means that according to the Galilean transformation the apparent speed of the passing light, as we measure it in the car, should not be c but should be c-u. For instance, if the car is going 100,000 mi/sec, and the light is going 186,000 mi/sec, then apparently the light going past the car should go 86,000 mi/sec. In any case, by measuring the speed of the light going past the car (if the Galilean transformation is correct for light), one could determine the speed of the car. A number of experiments based on this general idea were performed to determine the velocity of the earth, but they all failed - they gave no velocity at all." http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_15.html

Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Chapter 2: "The fundamental postulate of the theory of relativity, as it was called, was that the laws of science should be the same for all freely moving observers, no matter what their speed. This was true for Newton’s laws of motion, but now the idea was extended to include Maxwell's theory and the speed of light: all observers should measure the same speed of light, no matter how fast they are moving." http://index-of.co.uk/Science/Stephe...0Of%20Time.pdf

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old October 22nd 19, 08:07 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,492
Default Post-Sanity Logic in Fundamental Physics

Einstein's case is unique in the history of humankind. He managed to introduce an obviously nonsensical axiom - constancy of the speed of light - so malignant that its metastases overwhelmed and eventually killed the whole branch of science called physics:

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

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 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

Resurrection is possible (if it's not too late). See a suggestion for an Einstein-free physics in a series of tweets he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

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
Post-Sanity Science: Einstein's Relativity Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 August 30th 19 10:39 PM
Post-Sanity Science: Einstein's Twin Paradox Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 April 27th 19 08:23 PM
Albert Einstein: the Founder of Post-Sanity Science Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 March 8th 19 11:15 AM
Post-Truth (Post-Sanity) Education: Einstein's Time Travel Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 November 27th 18 09:17 AM
Post-truth or post-sanity world? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 December 18th 16 11:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.