WHAT EINSTEIN DISCOVERED IN 1907

Extremely silly Einsteinians (Brian Greene) do not know what Einstein
discovered in 1907 and introduce in Einstein zombie world as many
dimensions as they can, moderately silly Einsteinians (Lee Smolin)
know the most important implication of Einstein's discovery, clever
Einsteinians (John Norton) know precisely what Einstein discovered:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/251

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm Lee Smolin: "Quantum
theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few people have
appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories of
relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that the
laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that the
speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how the
source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that theory
are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers...UP_TimesNR.pdf "What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Pentcho Valev

NASA also seem to know what Einstein discovered in 1907:

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...1_head_dn13938
"A NASA review appears to spell the end for Gravity Probe B, the
project conceived in the 1960s to measure how the Earth warps the
fabric of nearby space-time.....It recommended that Gravity Probe B
receive no additional funding after its current funding runs out in
September.....Gravity Probe B's principal investigator, Stanford
University physicist Francis Everitt, could not be reached for
comment."

Pentcho Valev

On 28 mayo, 23:08, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Extremely silly Einsteinians (Brian Greene) do not know what Einstein
discovered in 1907 and introduce in Einstein zombie world as many
dimensions as they can, moderately silly Einsteinians (Lee Smolin)
know the most important implication of Einstein's discovery, clever
Einsteinians (John Norton) know precisely what Einstein discovered:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/251

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htmLee Smolin: "Quantum
theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few people have
appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories of
relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that the
laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that the
speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how the
source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that theory
are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/OntologyOUP_TimesNR.pdf"What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Pentcho Valev


Einstein's 1905 Relativity refers to constant c vacuum light speed. If
we have a gravitational field, we have no vacuum. I don't see any
contradiction between a constant c vacuum light speed and a variable
light speed in a gravitational field (or the variable light speed in a
variable refraction index media).

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

On May 30, 12:43*am, wrote:
On 28 mayo, 23:08, Pentcho Valev wrote:

Extremely silly Einsteinians (Brian Greene) do not know what Einstein
discovered in 1907 and introduce in Einstein zombie world as many
dimensions as they can, moderately silly Einsteinians (Lee Smolin)
know the most important implication of Einstein's discovery, clever
Einsteinians (John Norton) know precisely what Einstein discovered:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/251

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm LeeSmolin: "Quantum
theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few people have
appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories of
relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that the
laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that the
speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how the
source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that theory
are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers...UP_TimesNR.pdf "What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Pentcho Valev


Einstein's 1905 Relativity refers to constant c vacuum light speed. If
we have a gravitational field, we have no vacuum. I don't see any
contradiction between a constant c vacuum light speed and a variable
light speed in a gravitational field (or the variable light speed in a
variable refraction index media).

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Zombie logic perfect. Vacuum constant. No vacuum no constant.
Contradiction not. Zombie sing "Divine Einstein".

Pentcho Valev

On 30 mayo, 00:14, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On May 30, 12:43*am, wrote:





On 28 mayo, 23:08, Pentcho Valev wrote:

Extremely silly Einsteinians (Brian Greene) do not know what Einstein
discovered in 1907 and introduce in Einstein zombie world as many
dimensions as they can, moderately silly Einsteinians (Lee Smolin)
know the most important implication of Einstein's discovery, clever
Einsteinians (John Norton) know precisely what Einstein discovered:

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/251

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.....htmLeeSmolin: "Quantum
theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few people have
appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories of
relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that the
laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that the
speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how the
source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that theory
are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/OntologyOUP_TimesNR.pdf"What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Pentcho Valev


Einstein's 1905 Relativity refers to constant c vacuum light speed. If
we have a gravitational field, we have no vacuum. I don't see any
contradiction between a constant c vacuum light speed and a variable
light speed in a gravitational field (or the variable light speed in a
variable refraction index media).

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

Zombie logic perfect. Vacuum constant. No vacuum no constant.
Contradiction not. Zombie sing "Divine Einstein".

Pentcho Valev
- Ocultar texto de la cita -

- Mostrar texto de la cita -

Who said "no vacuum no constant"? It's well-known that in a constant
refraction index media we have a constant light speed, but less than c
if it is not vacuum. Vacuum light speed c is simply a maximal limit
value.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

wrote in message
...


Who said "no vacuum no constant"? It's well-known that in a constant
refraction index media we have a constant light speed, but less than c
if it is not vacuum. Vacuum light speed c is simply a maximal limit
value.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

================================================

Utter rubbish.

--
Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

1/2[tau(A)+tau(A')]= tau(B)
where
A = (0,0,0,t)
A' =(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v) +x'/(c+v))
B = (x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v))
x' = x-vt

Ref: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img22.gif

"Easy: he did NOT say that." - cretin

Androcles

On 30 mayo, 00:53, "Androcles" wrote:
wrote in message

...

Who said "no vacuum no constant"? It's well-known that in a constant
refraction index media we have a constant light speed, but less than c
if it is not vacuum. Vacuum light speed c is simply a maximal limit
value.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

================================================

Utter rubbish.

--
Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

1/2[tau(A)+tau(A')]= tau(B)
where
A = (0,0,0,t)
A' =(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v) +x'/(c+v))
B = (x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v))
x' = x-vt

*Ref: *http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img22.gif

"Easy: he did NOT say that." - cretin

Androcles

Hello, Androcles, nice to meet you again. I see that you continue
confusing the vectorial algebraic addition of veloties that refer to
THE SAME inertial frame (the c+v and c-v expressions that appear in
Einstein's 1905 30 June paper), with the relativistic composition rule
of velocities that refer to DIFFERENT inertial frames, derived in the
same paper a little ahead. A long time ago you stopped a more than two
months talking with me about the topic, just in the same point.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

On May 28, 3:08 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.helinium.nl/trolltech.gif

On Thu, 29 May 2008 17:20:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On 30 mayo, 00:53, "Androcles" wrote:
wrote in message

...

Who said "no vacuum no constant"? It's well-known that in a constant
refraction index media we have a constant light speed, but less than c
if it is not vacuum. Vacuum light speed c is simply a maximal limit
value.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)

================================================

Utter rubbish.

--
Why did Einstein say
the speed of light from A to B is c-v,
the speed of light from B to A is c+v,
the "time" each way is the same?

1/2[tau(A)+tau(A')]= tau(B)
where
A = (0,0,0,t)
A' =(0,0,0,t+x'/(c-v) +x'/(c+v))
B = (x',0,0,t+x'/(c-v))
x' = x-vt

*Ref: *http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einst...ures/img22.gif

"Easy: he did NOT say that." - cretin

Androcles

Hello, Androcles, nice to meet you again. I see that you continue
confusing the vectorial algebraic addition of veloties that refer to
THE SAME inertial frame (the c+v and c-v expressions that appear in
Einstein's 1905 30 June paper), with the relativistic composition rule
of velocities that refer to DIFFERENT inertial frames, derived in the
same paper a little ahead. A long time ago you stopped a more than two
months talking with me about the topic, just in the same point.

RVHG (Rafael Valls Hidalgo-Gato)


Welcome in Androcles' killfile.

w.
--
An Empirical Question for the antirelativistic Trolls:
What is the GPS carrier modulation signal frequency?
[ ] 1.023000000000 MHz (theor. unaffected)
[ ] 1.022999999543 MHz (rel. corrected)
[x ] (example for Androcles.)

On May 29, 8:32*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
NASA also seem to know what Einstein discovered in 1907:

http://space.newscientist.com/articl...1_head_dn13938
"A NASA review appears to spell the end for Gravity Probe B, the
project conceived in the 1960s to measure how the Earth warps the
fabric of nearby space-time.....It recommended that Gravity Probe B
receive no additional funding after its current funding runs out in
September.....Gravity Probe B's principal investigator, Stanford
University physicist Francis Everitt, could not be reached for
comment."

And of course John Baez, the Teacher of all Einsteinians all over the
world, now knows what Einstein discovered in 1907:

http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html
John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to
explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics
into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which
tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into
account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track --
but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or
both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I
realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in
these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions
to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the
right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight
less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity."

Years ago John Baez, the Teacher of all Einsteinians all over the
world, still did not know what Einstein had discovered in 1907 and
often demonstrated his incomparable sense of humour, applauded by his
sycophants:

http://everything2.com/node/1681948
"John Baez, a mathematical physicist at the University of California
Riverside, did the world a favor by creating a method of scoring
crackpot ideas. Baez, who works on the mathematics of string theory
and who's best known for his irregularly written but hugely popular on-
line column "This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics," created this
list after moderating the science.physics.research (SPR) newsgroup.
His Crackpot Index has been reprinted many times. Scientists smile
quietly when they read it. Crackpots have a different reaction: they
get defensive and red in the face, and strenuously object to his
methods. Which is why true scientists will continue to smile and
applaud Baez's brilliant Index."

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...8e668a90057feb
John Baez, Oct 27 1995: "You can see that I did not assert anything
about the photon's mass. I know what the photon's mass is, but I
never talk about it around here because the endless discussion of the
photon's mass is boring, boring, boring."

Pentcho Valev