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

THE DEEPEST SECRET OF EINSTEINIANA



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 8th 10, 07:25 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE DEEPEST SECRET OF EINSTEINIANA

When an observer starts moving towards the wave source, it is the
speed of the wave relative to him that changes (increases) whereas THE
WAVELENGTH REMAINS CONSTANT:

http://www.tutorvista.com/physics/the-doppler-effect
"2. The motion of the source brings about a change in the wavelength
of the sound waves and hence there is a change in the observed
frequency.
3. The motion of the observer merely changes the rate at which the
sound waves are recieved by him. The observer intercepts more waves
( when he approaches) or fewer waves ( when he recedes) each second.
The wavelength of the sound waves remains unaffected."

It was extremely difficult to find the above EXPLICIT confession in
Internet, although the constancy of the wavelength for a moving
observer is implicit in any interpretation of the Doppler effect for
sound waves. The reason is a severe selfcensorship imposed by
Einsteiniana: believers may stop singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we
all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity", then draw an
analogy between sound waves and light waves and finally (shock,
horror) start questioning Einstein's 1905 false light postulate! The
danger is so great that otherwise clever Einsteinians are forced to
teach blatant lies:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm
No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein
Not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr!
He explained the photo-electric effect,
And launched quantum physics with his intellect!
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 --
Egad, could that guy derive!
He gave us special relativity,
That's always made him a hero to me!
Brownian motion, my true devotion,
He mastered back in aught-five!
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, 8.033, relativity.
Einstein's postulates imply
That planes are shorter when they fly.
Their clocks are slowed by time dilation
And look warped from aberration.
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity.

Pentcho Valev

  #2  
Old May 9th 10, 06:20 AM posted to sci.logic,alt.philosophy,sci.astro,sci.math
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE DEEPEST SECRET OF EINSTEINIANA

Another deep secret of Einsteiniana: You will never find Einstein's
1911 equation:

c' = c(1+V/c^2)

showing that the speed of light varies with the gravitational
potential in accordance with Newton's emission theory of light, and
the trivial formula:

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

discussed in the same text:

http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is not constant in
a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as
well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were
not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field
of stars....Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation
in: 'On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light,'
Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911. which predated the full formal
development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is
widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99
of the Dover book 'The Principle of Relativity.' You will find in
section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed
of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c^2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
speed of light c0 is measured."

http://www.astronomynotes.com/relativity/s4.htm
"Prediction: light escaping from a large mass should lose energy---the
wavelength must increase since the speed of light is constant.
Stronger surface gravity produces a greater increase in the
wavelength. This is a consequence of time dilation. Suppose person A
on the massive object decides to send light of a specific frequency f
to person B all of the time. So every second, f wave crests leave
person A. The same wave crests are received by person B in an interval
of time interval of (1+z) seconds. He receives the waves at a
frequency of f/(1+z). Remember that the speed of light c = (the
frequency f) (the wavelength L). If the frequency is reduced by (1+z)
times, the wavelength must INcrease by (1+z) times: L_atB = (1+z)
L_atA. In the doppler effect, this lengthening of the wavelength is
called a redshift. For gravity, the effect is called a GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT."

Were Einsteinians to display the two formulas on the same page,
believers would stop singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe
in relativity, relativity, relativity", then see the relation between
the gravitational redshift factor 1+V/c^2 and c'=c(1+V/c^2), and
finally (shock, horror) come to the conclusion that the wavelength is
constant again and the Pound-Rebka experiment has in fact confirmed
not just Divine Albert's Divine Theory but, rather, Newton's emission
theory of light:

http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp
"So, faced with this evidence most readers must be wondering why we
learn about the importance of the constancy of speed of light. Did
Einstein miss this? Sometimes I find out that what's written in our
textbooks is just a biased version taken from the original work, so
after searching within the original text of the theory of GR by
Einstein, I found this quote: "In the second place our result shows
that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the
constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of
the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity
and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any
unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place
when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we
might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of
relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in
the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude
that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain
of validity ; its results hold only so long as we are able to
disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena
(e.g. of light)." - Albert Einstein (1879-1955) - The General Theory
of Relativity: Chapter 22 - A Few Inferences from the General
Principle of Relativity-. Today we find that since the Special Theory
of Relativity unfortunately became part of the so called mainstream
science, it is considered a sacrilege to even suggest that the speed
of light be anything other than a constant. This is somewhat
surprising since even Einstein himself suggested in a paper "On the
Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der
Physik, 35, 1911, that the speed of light might vary with the
gravitational potential. Indeed, the variation of the speed of light
in a vacuum or space is explicitly shown in Einstein's calculation for
the angle at which light should bend upon the influence of gravity.
One can find his calculation in his paper. The result is c'=c(1+V/c^2)
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the
measurement is taken. 1+V/c^2 is also known as the GRAVITATIONAL
REDSHIFT FACTOR."

Pentcho Valev wrote:

When an observer starts moving towards the wave source, it is the
speed of the wave relative to him that changes (increases) whereas THE
WAVELENGTH REMAINS CONSTANT:

http://www.tutorvista.com/physics/the-doppler-effect
"2. The motion of the source brings about a change in the wavelength
of the sound waves and hence there is a change in the observed
frequency.
3. The motion of the observer merely changes the rate at which the
sound waves are recieved by him. The observer intercepts more waves
( when he approaches) or fewer waves ( when he recedes) each second.
The wavelength of the sound waves remains unaffected."

It was extremely difficult to find the above EXPLICIT confession in
Internet, although the constancy of the wavelength for a moving
observer is implicit in any interpretation of the Doppler effect for
sound waves. The reason is a severe selfcensorship imposed by
Einsteiniana: believers may stop singing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we
all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity", then draw an
analogy between sound waves and light waves and finally (shock,
horror) start questioning Einstein's 1905 false light postulate! The
danger is so great that otherwise clever Einsteinians are forced to
teach blatant lies:

http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html
"Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide.
The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant
frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the
ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him
to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ang/index.html
John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer
were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now
pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would
mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to
have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE
BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)."

http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm
No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein
Not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr!
He explained the photo-electric effect,
And launched quantum physics with his intellect!
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 --
Egad, could that guy derive!
He gave us special relativity,
That's always made him a hero to me!
Brownian motion, my true devotion,
He mastered back in aught-five!
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, 8.033, relativity.
Einstein's postulates imply
That planes are shorter when they fly.
Their clocks are slowed by time dilation
And look warped from aberration.
We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity.
Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity.

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
Hubble's Deepest Look Into,Space Now Rendered In 3D Sam Wormley[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 7 April 8th 10 10:06 PM
Deepest xrays and black hole merger Ray Vingnutte Misc 0 April 8th 05 03:03 AM
Al Bean in Deepest Space [email protected] Technology 0 March 18th 05 02:43 PM
BBC - Hubble's deepest shot is a puzzle Nick UK Astronomy 2 September 30th 04 01:26 PM
My deepest apologies SPQR Amateur Astronomy 2 July 24th 03 06:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:35 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.