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

Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 18th 20, 07:15 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?

Yes physicists do know the truth about Einstein. In 2001 Lee Smolin and Joao Magueijo discovered that Einstein's special relativity is "the root of all the evil", and in 2003 they informed the scientific community about their discovery (Magueijo's book became a bestseller):

"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." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250 http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257

Special relativity can only be "the root of all the evil" if a postulate is false (logic forbids the combination "true postulates, evil theory"), and Smolin and Magueijo informed the scientific community about the false postulate as well:

Lee Smolin, The Trouble With Physics, p. 226: "Einstein's special theory of relativity is based on two postulates: One is the relativity of motion, and the second is the constancy and universality of the speed of light. Could the first postulate be true and the other false? If that was not possible, Einstein would not have had to make two postulates. But I don't think many people realized until recently that you could have a consistent theory in which you changed only the second postulate." http://www.amazon.com/Trouble-Physic.../dp/0618551050

"...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

A recent reminder:

Joao Magueijo, Niayesh Afshordi, Stephon Alexander: "So we have broken fundamentally this Lorentz invariance which equates space and time [...] It is the other postulate of relativity, that of constancy of c, that has to give way..." https://youtu.be/kbHBBtsrU1g?t=1431

So the scientific community has known the truth about Einstein and his relativity theory for at least 20 years. No discussion at all - in post-truth science "looking for the truth" is a silly phrase. Still many Einsteinians silently leave Einstein's sinking ship and promptly become experts in quantum mechanics, AI, philosophy, consciousness, biology, meaning of life, climate science, COVID-19, anything:

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

If there is a next, Einstein-free version of fundamental physics (it may be too late), Einstein's 1905 nonsensical axiom

"The speed of light is constant"

will be replaced with the correct axiom

"The wavelength of light is constant (for a given emitter)".

I have developed the idea in a series of tweets he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old September 19th 20, 12:04 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?

The quotations below would convince any sane scientist that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment directly proved Newton's variable speed of light and disproved the constant speed of light:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-It.../dp/0486406768

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)."

See more he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old September 19th 20, 06:57 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?

The quotations below would convince any sane scientist that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment directly proved Newton's variable speed of light and disproved the constant speed of light:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-It.../dp/0486406768

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

See more he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old September 19th 20, 11:14 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?

Philip Ball, Lee Smolin and Steve Giddings certainly do know the truth about Einstein:

Philip Ball: "And by making the clock's tick relative - what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another - Einstein's theory of special relativity not only destroyed any notion of absolute time but made time equivalent to a dimension in space: the future is already out there waiting for us; we just can't see it until we get there. This view is a logical and metaphysical dead end, says Smolin." http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2013...reality-review

"Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..." https://www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-C.../dp/B00AEGQPFE

What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... [...] The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..." https://www.edge.org/response-detail/25477

More he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev
  #5  
Old September 19th 20, 03:36 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Do Physicists Know the Truth about Einstein?

The statement "physicists know the truth about Einstein" could be misleading. Theoretical physicists are practitioners of doublethink - they accept both the truth and the lie, "with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth":

George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. [...] ...with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

http://www.ferovanemocnice.cz/images...es/f_pic31.jpg

See 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
How Fatally Einstein Brainwashed Physicists Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 January 17th 17 03:24 PM
Every Day More Physicists Are Coming Closer To The Truth AboutGravity / S D Rodrian SD Solar 13 April 26th 11 10:56 AM
Every Day More Physicists Are Coming Closer To The Truth AboutGravity / S D Rodrian SD UK Astronomy 2 July 13th 10 03:34 AM
TRUTH IN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 August 16th 08 05:49 PM
Steering atoms toward better navigation, physicists test Newton and Einstein along the way (Forwarded) Andrew Yee[_1_] News 0 February 22nd 07 05:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:46 PM.


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.