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 GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 14th 12, 08:31 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/s...oax/index.html
Piltdown Man - the greatest hoax in the history of science?

No. The Sirius B hoax was even greater:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2010AAS...21530404H
"In January 1924 Arthur Eddington wrote to Walter S. Adams at the Mt. Wilson Observatory suggesting a measurement of the "Einstein shift" in Sirius B and providing an estimate of its magnitude. Adams' 1925 published results agreed remarkably well with Eddington's estimate. Initially this achievement was hailed as the third empirical test of General Relativity (after Mercury's anomalous perihelion advance and the 1919 measurement of the deflection of starlight). IT HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR SOME TIME THAT BOTH EDDINGTON'S ESTIMATE AND ADAMS' MEASUREMENT UNDERESTIMATED THE TRUE SIRIUS B GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT BY A FACTOR OF FOUR."

http://irfu.cea.fr/Phocea/file.php?f...TE-052-456.pdf
"C'est ce qu'aurait dû trouver Adams sur ses plaques s'il n'avait pas été "influencé" par le calcul erroné d'Eddington. L'écart est tellement flagrant que la suspicion de fraude a bien été envisagée."

http://www.gravityresearchfoundation...therington.pdf
"...Eddington asked Adams to attempt the measurement. (...) ...Adams reported an average differential redshift of nineteen kilometers per second, very nearly the predicted gravitational redshift. Eddington was delighted with the result... (...) In 1928 Joseph Moore at the Lick Observatory measured differences between the redshifts of Sirius and Sirius B... (...) ...the average was nineteen kilometers per second, precisely what Adams had reported. (...) More seriously damaging to the reputation of Adams and Moore is the measurement in the 1960s at Mount Wilson by Jesse Greenstein, J.Oke, and H.Shipman. They found a differential redshift for Sirius B of roughly eighty kilometers per second."

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old December 15th 12, 09:50 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Parhaps the muon time dilation hoax is even greater than the Sirius B hoax:

http://web.mit.edu/8.13/www/JLExperiments/JLExp14.pdf
"The idea of this experiment is, in effect, to compare the mean time from the creation event to the decay event (i.e. the mean life) of muons at rest with the mean time for muons in motion. Suppose that a given muon at rest lasts for a time tb. Equation 5 predicts that its life in a reference frame with respect to which it is moving with velocity v, is (gamma)tb, i.e. greater than its rest life by the Lorentz factor gamma. This is the effect called relativistic time dilation. (...) In this experiment you will observe the radioactive decay of muons and measure their decay curve (distribution in lifetime) after they have come to rest in a large block of plastic scintillator, and determine their mean life. From your previous measurement of the mean velocity of cosmic-ray muons at sea level and the known variation with altitude of their flux, you can infer a lower limit on the mean life of the muons in motion. A comparison of the inferred lower limit with the measured mean life at rest provides a vivid demonstration of relativistic time dilation."

Note that muons "at rest" in fact "come to rest in a large block of plastic scintillator". Any time a muon bumps into an obstacle so that its speed instantly changes from about 300000km/s to zero, its forced and quick disintegration makes Einsteinians sing "Divine Einstein" and go into convulsions. Why? Simply because rationality in today's science is so devastated that, as the muon undergoes such a terrible crash, Einsteinians can safely say 'Lo, a muon at rest' (nobody cares to contradict them) and infer that non-crashing (moving) muons undergo time dilation and for that reason live longer than crashing ("at rest") muons. Sane scientists would compare the short lifetime of muons "at rest" with the short lifetime of a driver whose car has come to a sudden stop into a wall:

http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/ugrad...on-rutgers.pdf
"In order to measure the decay constant for a muon at rest (or the corresponding mean-life) one must stop and detect a muon, wait for and detect its decay products, and measure the time interval between capture and decay."

http://cosmic.lbl.gov/more/SeanFottrell.pdf
Experiment 1: The lifetime of muons at rest (...) Some of these muons are stopped within the plastic of the detector and the electronics are designed to measure the time between their arrival and their subsequent decay."

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old December 15th 12, 10:37 AM posted to sci.astro,sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 74
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
...

Parhaps the muon time dilation hoax is even greater than the Sirius B hoax:

http://web.mit.edu/8.13/www/JLExperiments/JLExp14.pdf
"The idea of this experiment is, in effect, to compare the mean time from
the creation event to the decay event (i.e. the mean life) of muons at rest
with the mean time for muons in motion. Suppose that a given muon at rest
lasts for a time tb. Equation 5 predicts that its life in a reference frame
with respect to which it is moving with velocity v, is (gamma)tb, i.e.
greater than its rest life by the Lorentz factor gamma. This is the effect
called relativistic time dilation. (...) In this experiment you will observe
the radioactive decay of muons and measure their decay curve (distribution
in lifetime) after they have come to rest in a large block of plastic
scintillator, and determine their mean life. From your previous measurement
of the mean velocity of cosmic-ray muons at sea level and the known
variation with altitude of their flux, you can infer a lower limit on the
mean life of the muons in motion. A comparison of the inferred lower limit
with the measured mean life at rest provides a vivid demonstration of
relativistic time dilation."

Note that muons "at rest" in fact "come to rest in a large block of plastic
scintillator". Any time a muon bumps into an obstacle so that its speed
instantly changes from about 300000km/s to zero, its forced and quick
disintegration makes Einsteinians sing "Divine Einstein" and go into
convulsions. Why? Simply because rationality in today's science is so
devastated that, as the muon undergoes such a terrible crash, Einsteinians
can safely say 'Lo, a muon at rest' (nobody cares to contradict them) and
infer that non-crashing (moving) muons undergo time dilation and for that
reason live longer than crashing ("at rest") muons. Sane scientists would
compare the short lifetime of muons "at rest" with the short lifetime of a
driver whose car has come to a sudden stop into a wall:

http://www.physics.rutgers.edu/ugrad...on-rutgers.pdf
"In order to measure the decay constant for a muon at rest (or the
corresponding mean-life) one must stop and detect a muon, wait for and
detect its decay products, and measure the time interval between capture and
decay."

http://cosmic.lbl.gov/more/SeanFottrell.pdf
Experiment 1: The lifetime of muons at rest (...) Some of these muons are
stopped within the plastic of the detector and the electronics are designed
to measure the time between their arrival and their subsequent decay."

Pentcho Valev
================================================== =
Certainly muons have the greatest circularity.
Travelling from upper atmosphere to sea level (100,000 meters) in 64 usec
(speed = 5c), according to SR they cannot exceed c and so must be time
dilated which proves SR.
Actually Bailey, Borer et.al. failed elementary algebra.
http://androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Muons/Muons.htm

100,000 meters which defines the edge of space is the altitude required for
SpaceShipOne to obtain the X-prize
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceShipOne

If the measured lifespan of the muon is 64 usec by stationary clocks as
claimed
and the measured distance by stationary rulers is 100,000 meters then the
measured speed of the muon exceeds c regardless of any fantastic 2.2 usec in
the muon's frame of reference.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway.
When I get my O.B.E. I'll be an earlobe.


  #4  
Old December 15th 12, 05:38 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Why do Einsteinians lie so blatantly? Here is their answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEyfr10lgNw
That's the way ahah ahah we like it ahah ahah!

Pentcho Valev
  #5  
Old December 17th 12, 11:28 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

The Sirius B hoax was extremely successful for more than 50 years - as a result, Divine Albert's Divine Theory was firmly established and all opposition was crushed - but this hoax had to be abandoned in the end. Precise measurements made in the 60s by Jesse Greenstein, J.Oke, and H.Shipman showed that Divine Albert's Divine Theory offers predictions that deviate from the real values by a factor of four. So by the middle of the 20th century there was an urgent need for a measured gravitational redshift gloriously confirming Divine Albert's Divine Theory. Pound and Rebka provided it:

http://einstein.stanford.edu/content...ty/a10758.html
"What proofs are there for general relativity? So far, GR has made the following specific predictions: (...) 3...Clocks run slower in strong gravitational fields. This was confirmed by Robert Pound and George Rebka at Harvard University in 1959, and by Robert Vessot in the 1960's and 70's using high-precession hydrogen maser clocks flown on jet planes and on satellites."

The Pound-Rebka hoax successfully devastated physics for another 50 years and made Divine Albert's Divine Theory absolutely invincible. So nowadays Einsteinians can even tell the truth (no danger at all), and the truth is that the Pound-Rebka experiment in fact confirmed Newton's emission theory of light:

http://www.einstein-online.info/spot...t_white_dwarfs
Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."

Pentcho Valev
  #6  
Old December 30th 12, 10:45 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

How blatantly Einsteinians can lie:

http://math.bu.edu/people/levit/AlbertEinstein.pdf
John Stachel: "Albert Einstein: A Man for the Millenium? (...) It was Albert Einstein (Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper, 1905) who first realized the need to replace such ideas, based on classical kinematics, with a new kinematics based on four key ideas: 1. Omit all reference to the hypothetical ether frame; 2. Take the failure of all attempts to detect absolute motion at face value, and postulate the relativity principle (all inertial frame of reference are equivalent) for all physical phenomena; 3. Add the WELL-TESTED postulate that the speed of light is independent of that of its source; 4. Combining 1, 2 and 3, one can derive the Lorentz transformations between any two inertial frames of reference."

John Stachel knows perfectly well that the postulate that the speed of light is independent of that of its source was by no means WELL-TESTED. Rather, in 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment UNEQUIVOCALLY confirmed the variable speed of light predicted by Newton's emission theory of light:

http://www.amazon.ca/Introduction-re.../dp/B003YEIA3S
James H. Smith: "Si la lumière était un flot de particules mécaniques obéissant aux lois de la mécanique, il n'y aurait aucune difficulté à comprendre les résultats de l'expérience de Michelson-Morley.... Supposons, par exemple, qu'une fusée se déplace avec une vitesse (1/2)c par rapport à un observateur et qu'un rayon de lumière parte de son nez. Si la vitesse de la lumière signifiait vitesse des "particules" de la lumière par rapport à leur source, alors ces "particules" de lumière se déplaceraient à la vitesse c/2+c=(3/2)c par rapport à l'observateur. Mais ce comportement ne ressemble pas du tout à celui d'une onde, car les ondes se propagent à une certaine vitesse par rapport au milieu dans lequel elles se développent et non pas à une certaine vitesse par rapport à leur source. (...) Il nous faut insister sur le fait suivant: QUAND EINSTEIN PROPOSA QUE LA VITESSE DE LA LUMIÈRE SOIT INDÉPENDANTE DE CELLE DE LA SOURCE, IL N'EN EXISTAIT AUCUNE PREUVE EXPÉRIMENTALE."

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/...relativity.htm
John Stachel: "An emission theory is perfectly compatible with the relativity principle. Thus, the M-M experiment presented no problem; nor is stellar abberration difficult to explain on this basis."

http://www.philoscience.unibe.ch/doc...S07/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "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
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."

Pentcho Valev
  #7  
Old January 2nd 13, 01:45 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Two FUNDAMENTAL LIES in Einsteiniana's education:

FUNDAMENTAL LIE 1. Maxwell's 19th century electromagnetic theory predicted that the speed of light relative to the observer is independent of the speed of the observer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpw68rvF4pc
"Brian Cox discusses Einstein's theory of relativity"

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.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."

FUNDAMENTAL LIE 2: The Michelson-Morley experiment invalidated the Galilean transformation according to which, if the relative speed of the light source and the observer is v, then the speed of light relative to the observer is c'=c+v:

http://www.berkeleyscience.com/relativity.htm
"The conclusion of the Michelson-Morley experiment was that the speed of light was a constant c in any inertial frame. Why is this result so surprising? First, it invalidates the Galilean coordinate transformation. Note that with the frames as defined in the previous section, if light is travelling in the x' direction in frame O' with velocity c, then its speed in the O frame is, by the Galilean transform, c+v, not c as measured. This invalidates two thousand years of understanding of the nature of time and space. The only comparable discovery is the discovery that the earth isn't flat! The Michelson Morley experiment has inevitably brought about a profound change in our understanding of the world."

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Faster Than the Speed of Light, Joao Magueijo: "A missile fired from a plane moves faster than one fired from the ground because the plane's speed adds to the missile's speed. If I throw something forward on a moving train, its speed with respect to the platform is the speed of that object plus that of the train. You might think that the same should happen to light: Light flashed from a train should travel faster. However, what the Michelson-Morley experiments showed was that this was not the case: Light always moves stubbornly at the same speed. This means that if I take a light ray and ask several observers moving with respect to each other to measure the speed of this light ray, they will all agree on the same apparent speed!"

http://www.pourlascience.fr/ewb_page...vite-26042.php
Marc Lachièze-Rey: "Mais au cours du XIXe siècle, diverses expériences, et notamment celle de Michelson et Morley, ont convaincu les physiciens que la vitesse de la lumière dans le vide est invariante. En particulier, la vitesse de la lumière ne s'ajoute ni ne se retranche à celle de sa source si celle-ci est en mouvement."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...993018,00.html
Stephen Hawking: "So if you were traveling in the same direction as the light, you would expect that its speed would appear to be lower, and if you were traveling in the opposite direction to the light, that its speed would appear to be higher. Yet a series of experiments failed to find any evidence for differences in speed due to motion through the ether. The most careful and accurate of these experiments was carried out by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley at the Case Institute in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1887......It was as if light always traveled at the same speed relative to you, no matter how you were moving."

Pentcho Valev
  #8  
Old February 1st 13, 04:53 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE

Perhaps the most repeated lie ever in science:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajhFNcUTJI0
Einstein and The Special Theory of Relativity: "Before Einstein was even born, physicists showed that the speed of light was one of those absolute things which can't be changed by a switcheroo. So any switcheroo we do has to keep light moving at the same speed..."

No physicist showed, both before and after Einstein was born, that the speed of light was constant - in Maxwell's theory, for instance, the speed of light varied with the speed of the observer. However, in accordance with Goebbels' principle, the century-long repetition of the lie has convinced everybody that Einstein's 1905 light postulate was fully justified. And since the speed of light is absolute, Divine Einstein, yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity, time is relative in the following idiotic way:

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")."

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
Bush: Greatest World Leader & Greatest President In History? ` ` Anonymous[_12_] Astronomy Misc 2 March 18th 08 10:18 PM
Bush: Greatest World Leader & Greatest President In History? ` ` Anonymous[_12_] Amateur Astronomy 2 March 18th 08 10:18 PM
EVOLUTION -- GREATEST CONSPIRACY IN THE HISTORY OF HISTORY --Why, It's Even Worse Than 911 BradGuth Astronomy Misc 3 March 2nd 08 03:46 AM
EVOLUTION -- GREATEST CONSPIRACY IN THE HISTORY OF HISTORY --Why, It's Even Worse Than 911 Tappit Hen Astronomy Misc 1 March 1st 08 02:25 PM
EVOLUTION -- GREATEST CONSPIRACY IN THE HISTORY OF HISTORY -- Why, It's Even Worse Than 911 Doug Weller Astronomy Misc 0 March 1st 08 02:23 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:05 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.