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

EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 15th 15, 01:02 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS

Up until recently almost all Einsteinians ("later writers" in John Norton's text below) fraudulently used the Michelson-Morley experiment as support for Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate."

At present the original fraud seems to have been abandoned (partially due to my activity) but a new version is being advanced. Improved Michelson-Morley experiments now gloriously confirm not just the constancy of the speed of light but "a core component of Einstein's theory of Relativity known as 'Lorentz symmetry,' which predicts that the speed of light is the same in all directions":

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-greater-precision.html
PHYS.ORG: "Researchers from The University of Western Australia and Humboldt University of Berlin have completed testing that has effectively measured the spatial consistency of the speed of light with a precision ten times greater than ever before. The stringent testing also confirmed a core component of Einstein's theory of Relativity known as 'Lorentz symmetry,' which predicts that the speed of light is the same in all directions."

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/15...comms9174.html
"Lorentz symmetry is a foundational property of modern physics, underlying the standard model of particles and general relativity. It is anticipated that these two theories are low-energy approximations of a single theory that is unified and consistent at the Planck scale. Many unifying proposals allow Lorentz symmetry to be broken, with observable effects appearing at Planck-suppressed levels; thus, precision tests of Lorentz invariance are needed to assess and guide theoretical efforts. Here we use ultrastable oscillator frequency sources to perform a modern Michelson-Morley experiment and make the most precise direct terrestrial test to date of Lorentz symmetry.... (...) This order of magnitude improvement over previous Michelson-Morley experiments allows us to set comprehensive simultaneous bounds on nine boost and rotation anisotropies of the speed of light, finding no significant violations of Lorentz symmetry."

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old September 15th 15, 05:31 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS

In the end Phys.org decided to return to the original fraud:

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-precise...-constant.html
Phys.org: "Most precise test of Lorentz symmetry for the photon finds that the speed of light is indeed constant. (...) One important consequence of Lorentz symmetry is that the speed of light is invariant, or a constant in vacuum. The fact that photons in vacuum always move at a speed of just under 300,000 km per second is intimately connected to the concepts in special relativity. In the new study, the researchers performed an experiment that attempted to measure any tiny frequency variation of light, which would indicate a variation in the speed of light. Their experiment consists of a highly sensitive Michelson-Morley cavity test, which is an updated version of the seminal Michelson-Morley interferometer used in the late 1800s to measure the speed of light in the search for an "aether" that pervaded the universe (for which, of course, no evidence was found)."

Experiments of the Michelson-Morley type cannot prove that the speed of light is constant. Rather, they show the opposite. In 1887 (prior to FitzGerald and Lorentz advancing the ad hoc length contraction hypothesis), the Michelson-Morley experiment unequivocally confirmed the variable speed of light predicted by Newton's emission theory of light and refuted the constant (independent of the speed of the light source) speed of light predicted by the immobile ether theory and later adopted by Einstein as his special relativity's second postulate:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers...nion_final.pdf
"These efforts were long misled by an exaggeration of the importance of one experiment, the Michelson-Morley experiment, even though Einstein later had trouble recalling if he even knew of the experiment prior to his 1905 paper. This one experiment, in isolation, has little force. Its null result happened to be fully compatible with Newton's own emission theory of light. Located in the context of late 19th century electrodynamics when ether-based, wave theories of light predominated, however, it presented a serious problem that exercised the greatest theoretician of the day."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
"In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE." x

http://books.google.com/books?id=JokgnS1JtmMC
Relativity and Its Roots, Banesh Hoffmann, p.92: "There are various remarks to be made about this second principle. For instance, if it is so obvious, how could it turn out to be part of a revolution - especially when the first principle is also a natural one? 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. If it was so obvious, though, why did he need to state it as a principle? Because, having taken from the idea of light waves in the ether the one aspect that he needed, he declared early in his paper, to quote his own words, that "the introduction of a 'luminiferous ether' will prove to be superfluous."

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old September 16th 15, 06:34 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNE6S6XLSB0
Brian Cox (7:19): "Maxwell predicted that light travels at the same speed no matter how you look at it. (...) No matter how I move relative to you we all agree on the speed of light."

Maxwell did not predict that - Brian Cox is lying blatantly. Actually Maxwell's 19th century electromagnetic theory predicted that the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/Chasing.pdf
John Norton: "That [Maxwell's] theory allows light to slow and be frozen in the frame of reference of a sufficiently rapidly moving observer."

http://culturesciencesphysique.ens-l..._CSP_relat.xml
Gabrielle Bonnet, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon: "Les équations de Maxwell font en particulier intervenir une constante, c, qui est la vitesse de la lumière dans le vide. Par un changement de référentiel classique, si c est la vitesse de la lumière dans le vide dans un premier référentiel, et si on se place désormais dans un nouveau référentiel en translation par rapport au premier à la vitesse constante v, la lumière devrait désormais aller à la vitesse c-v si elle se déplace dans la direction et le sens de v, et à la vitesse c+v si elle se déplace dans le sens contraire."

http://www.printsasia.com/book/a-bri...ing-0553380168
Stephen Hawking: "Maxwell's theory predicted that radio or light waves should travel at a certain fixed speed. But Newton's theory had got rid of the idea of absolute rest, so if light was supposed to travel at a fixed speed, one would have to say what that fixed speed was to be measured relative to. It was therefore suggested that there was a substance called the "ether" that was present everywhere, even in "empty" space. Light waves should travel through the ether as sound waves travel through air, and their speed should therefore be relative to the ether. Different observers, moving relative to the ether, would see light coming toward them at different speeds, but light's speed relative to the ether would remain fixed."

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
Limits of the Possible G=EMC^2 Misc 4 June 27th 11 04:42 AM
Limits on the Drake eq. Frogwatch[_2_] Policy 5 February 15th 11 11:44 PM
EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 13 May 28th 08 01:02 AM
eyepiece limits D. Couillard Amateur Astronomy 22 September 24th 04 12:41 PM
Limits of Spectroscopy Abdul Ahad UK Astronomy 40 March 9th 04 08:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:22 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.