TWO VIDEOS FATAL FOR EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

The first fatal video demonstrates that, when the observer starts moving towards the light source with speed v, the speed of the light pulses relative to him increases (shifts from c to c'=c+v), in violation of special relativity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE
"Doppler effect - when an observer moves towards a stationary source. ...the velocity of the wave relative to the observer is faster than that when it is still."

The second fatal video demonstrates that, in a gravitational field, the speed of light varies in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+gh/c^2), as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of (the final version of) general relativity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ2SVPahBzg
Relativity 3 - gravity and light. "The light is perceived to be falling in a gravitational field just like a mechanical object would." (...) 07:56 : (c+dc)/c = 1+(g/c^2)dh

The two fundamental equations of Newton's emission theory of light, c'=c+v and c'=c(1+gh/c^2), are closely related (the validity of the former entails the validity of the latter and vice versa):

http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/cla...elativity.html
Michael Fowler, University of Virginia: "What happens if we shine the pulse of light vertically down inside a freely falling elevator, from a laser in the center of the ceiling to a point in the center of the floor? Let us suppose the flash of light leaves the ceiling at the instant the elevator is released into free fall. If the elevator has height h, it takes time h/c to reach the floor. This means the floor is moving downwards at speed gh/c when the light hits. Question: Will an observer on the floor of the elevator see the light as Doppler shifted? The answer has to be no, because inside the elevator, by the Equivalence Principle, conditions are identical to those in an inertial frame with no fields present. There is nothing to change the frequency of the light. This implies, however, that to an outside observer, stationary in the earth's gravitational field, the frequency of the light will change. This is because he will agree with the elevator observer on what was the initial frequency f of the light as it left the laser in the ceiling (the elevator was at rest relative to the earth at that moment) so if the elevator operator maintains the light had the same frequency f as it hit the elevator floor, which is moving at gh/c relative to the earth at that instant, the earth observer will say the light has frequency f(1 + v/c) = f(1+gh/c^2), using the Doppler formula for very low speeds."

Substituting f=c/L (L is the wavelength) into Fowler's equation gives:

f' = f(1+v/c) = f(1+gh/c^2) = (c+v)/L = c(1+gh/c^2)/L = c'/L

where f' is the frequency measured by both the observer "stationary in the earth's gravitational field" and an equivalent observer who, in gravitation-free space, moves with speed v=gh/c towards the emitter. Accordingly, c'=c+v=c(1+gh/c^2) is the speed of light relative to those two observers.. Clearly the frequency shift is due to a shift in the speed of light - the speed of light varies with both the gravitational potential and the speed of the observer as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev

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. (...) In the above paragraphs, we have only considered moving sources. In fact, a closer look at cases where it is the receiver that is in motion will show that this kind of motion leads to a very similar kind of 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."

"Four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses" means that the speed of the pulses relative to a stationary (with respect to the source) receiver is c = 3d/t:

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

while the speed of the pulses relative to the moving receiver is c' = 4d/t, where d is the distance between subsequent pulses and t is "the time it takes the source to emit three pulses":

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

That is, the speed of the light pulses relative to the moving receiver is:

c' = 4d/t = (4/3)c

in violation of special relativity.

Pentcho Valev

The most favourite picture in Einsteiniana:

http://lewebpedagogique.com/physique...8doppler_p.gif

Einsteinians already know that the motion of the observer changes the wavelength of light waves so that the speed of the waves relative to the observer can remain constant, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. The picture convinces them that the motion of the observer changes the wavelength of sound waves as well, which means that Divine Albert's ideas, although concerning only light waves in the beginning, are now universal and ineradicable. The wrestling proved worth it in the end:

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/...relativity.htm
John Stachel: "But here he ran into the most blatant-seeming contradiction, which I mentioned earlier when first discussing the two principles. As noted then, the Maxwell-Lorentz equations imply that there exists (at least) one inertial frame in which the speed of light is a constant regardless of the motion of the light source. Einstein's version of the relativity principle (minus the ether) requires that, if this is true for one inertial frame, it must be true for all inertial frames. 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."

Pentcho Valev

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwe...hapter3.4.html
"He set to work to exercise himself in crimestop. He presented himself with propositions - "the Party says the earth is flat", "the party says that ice is heavier than water" - and trained himself in not seeing or not understanding the arguments that contradicted them. It was not easy. It needed great powers of reasoning and improvisation. The arithmetical problems raised, for instance, by such a statement as "two and two make five" were beyond his intellectual grasp. It needed also a sort of athleticism of mind, an ability at one moment to make the most delicate use of logic and at the next to be unconscious of the crudest logical errors. Stupidity was as necessary as intelligence, and as difficult to attain."

This is in Big Brother's world. In Divine Albert's world intellectuals exercise themselves in this way: "Einsteiniana says that, when the observer starts moving away from the light source, the flashes overtake him at a slower rate and accordingly he measures their frequency to have decreased. But this does not mean that the velocity of the flashes relative to the observer has decreased as well. No! Never! The velocity is the same in all the reference frames, including that of the moving observer!"

After long exercise, intellectuals clearly see: The frequency does change, the velocity doesn't, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=EVzUyE2oD1w
Dr Ricardo Eusebi: "f'=f(1+v/c). Light frequency is relative to the observer. The velocity is not though. The velocity is the same in all the reference frames."

Pentcho Valev