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

MAXWELL AND EINSTEIN'S LIGHT POSTULATE



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 20th 13, 07:27 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MAXWELL AND EINSTEIN'S LIGHT POSTULATE

99% of Einsteinians all over the world teach the following fundamental lie:

http://www.physics.fsu.edu/courses/S...15-ch27__2.pdf
"He [Maxwell] also showed the speed of light is independent of the motion of both the source and the observer."

http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~gfl/...5/Lecture1.pdf
"As Maxwell's equations provide a single wave solution, with a velocity c, Einstein proposed the postulate of the constancy of the speed of light: The velocity of light in free space is the same for all inertial observers."

http://www.lecture-notes.co.uk/sussk...al-relativity/
Leonard Susskind: "One of the predictions of Maxwell's equations is that the velocity of electromagnetic waves, or light, is always measured to have the same value, regardless of the frame in which it is measured."

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-S.../dp/0306817586
Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?), Brian Cox, Jeff Forshaw, p. 91: "...Maxwell's brilliant synthesis of the experimental results of Faraday and others strongly suggested that the speed of light should be the same for all observers."

1% of Einsteinians all over the world teach the truth about Maxwell and the speed of light (according to Maxwell's theory, 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.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/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."

In fact, Einstein discovered his 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate by looking at the Lorentz transform (there was no other source). The constancy of the speed of light was a consequence of the Lorentz transform but Einstein changed the order - the constancy became an initial postulate and the Lorentz transform a consequence of that postulate. So Albert the Plagiarist became Divine Albert:

http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm
DIVINE EINSTEIN. "No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel - He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old August 20th 13, 01:40 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default MAXWELL AND EINSTEIN'S LIGHT POSTULATE

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."

The problem is still unsolved:

http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf
Paul Fendley: "Now let's see what this does to the frequency of the light. We know that even without special relativity, observers moving at different velocities measure different frequencies. (This is the reason the pitch of an ambulance changes as it passes you it doesn't change if you're on the ambulance). This is called the Doppler shift, and for small relative velocity v it is easy to show that the frequency shifts from f to f(1+v/c) (it goes up heading toward you, down away from you). There are relativistic corrections, but these are negligible here."

That is, if the frequency measured by the stationary observer is f=c/L (L is the wavelength), the frequency measured by an observer moving towards the light source with speed v is:

f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = c'/L

where c'=c+v has a definite physical meaning: it is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer. Clearly special relativity is violated. Einsteinians, if there are any left, couldn't care less of course.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old August 22nd 13, 12:23 AM posted to sci.astro
nonoleta7
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default MAXWELL AND EINSTEIN'S LIGHT POSTULATE

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:40:17 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
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."



The problem is still unsolved:



http://rockpile.phys.virginia.edu/mod04/mod34.pdf

Paul Fendley: "Now let's see what this does to the frequency of the light. We know that even without special relativity, observers moving at different velocities measure different frequencies. (This is the reason the pitch of an ambulance changes as it passes you it doesn't change if you're on the ambulance). This is called the Doppler shift, and for small relative velocity v it is easy to show that the frequency shifts from f to f(1+v/c) (it goes up heading toward you, down away from you). There are relativistic corrections, but these are negligible here."



That is, if the frequency measured by the stationary observer is f=c/L (L is the wavelength), the frequency measured by an observer moving towards the light source with speed v is:



f' = f(1+v/c) = (c+v)/L = c'/L



where c'=c+v has a definite physical meaning: it is the speed of the light waves relative to the moving observer. Clearly special relativity is violated. Einsteinians, if there are any left, couldn't care less of course.



Pentcho Valev


Einstein's theory that the speed of light is constant comes from the Michelson-Morley's experiment. They all assumed that the Earth moves around the Sun. Now if that assumption was incorrect (meaning the Earth is stationary), then obviously the measured speed of light is constant.
 




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
WHY EINSTEIN'S LIGHT POSTULATE IS FALSE Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 December 3rd 12 10:34 AM
CARLO ROVELLI ABOUT EINSTEIN 1905 FALSE LIGHT POSTULATE Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 March 19th 08 12:38 PM
EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT GOT RID OF THE FALSE LIGHT POSTULATE Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 4 October 19th 07 03:14 AM
VIOLATION OF THE LIGHT POSTULATE IN EINSTEIN ZOMBIE WORLD Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 0 August 27th 07 01:39 PM
RELATIVITY WITHOUT EINSTEIN LIGHT POSTULATE Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 10 August 16th 07 06:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:55 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.