|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
"Pentcho" wrote while in the light: (snip)
Get over the light and dig into some black hole stuff and get back to us if you can! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole light. HTHelps. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
MAD CRESS IN EINSTEINIANA SALAD FURY
Pentcho Valev wrote:
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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
Einstein teaching idiocies in 1921:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...66838A 639EDE The New York Times, April 19, 1921 "Michelson showed that relative to the moving co-ordinate system K1, the light traveled with the same velocity as relative to K, which is contrary to the above observation. How could this be reconciled? Professor Einstein asked." Still sane scientists do exist in 1924: http://www.jstor.org/pss/3604224 "Of course an emission theory gives the simplest possible explanation of aberration and of the Michelson-Morley result." Complete madness nowadays: http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php?...64&It emid=66 Stephen Hawking: "Interestingly enough, Laplace himself wrote a paper in 1799 on how some stars could have a gravitational field so strong that light could not escape, but would be dragged back onto the star. He even calculated that a star of the same density as the Sun, but two hundred and fifty times the size, would have this property. But although Laplace may not have realised it, the same idea had been put forward 16 years earlier by a Cambridge man, John Mitchell, in a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Both Mitchell and Laplace thought of light as consisting of particles, rather like cannon balls, that could be slowed down by gravity, and made to fall back on the star. But a famous experiment, carried out by two Americans, Michelson and Morley in 1887, showed that light always travelled at a speed of one hundred and eighty six thousand miles a second, no matter where it came from. How then could gravity slow down light, and make it fall back." Pentcho Valev wrote: 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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
Doublethink again:
http://july.fixedreference.org/en/20...iferous_aether "Other than its apparently unusual mechanical properties, the existence of a medium for light should mean that the velocity of light would be relative to the medium, so that a moving observer would see an altered velocity of light, but this was not consistent with later experiments. More concretely, Maxwell's equations required that all electromagnetic waves in vacuum propagate at a fixed speed, c." THE TRUTH is that, for all etherists including Maxwell: "a moving observer would see an altered velocity of light". Note the idiotic "More concretely" above, followed by THE LIE (which is always one leap ahead of THE TRUTH): "Maxwell's equations required that all electromagnetic waves in vacuum propagate at a fixed speed, c". In this particular case of doublethink John Norton finds THE TRUTH (that the speed of light is variable for a moving observer, both in Newton's emission theory of light and in Maxwell's ether theory) too dangerous so he teaches THE LIE, THE WHOLE LIE AND NOTHING BUT THE LIE: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ity/index.html John Norton: "Why Einstein should believe the light postulate is a little harder to see. We would expect that a light signal would slow down relative to us if we chased after it. The light postulate says no. No matter how fast an inertial observer is traveling in pursuit of the light signal, that observer will always see the light signal traveling at the same speed, c. The principal reason for his acceptance of the light postulate was his lengthy study of electrodynamics, the theory of electric and magnetic fields. The theory was the most advanced physics of the time. Some 50 years before, Maxwell had shown that light was merely a ripple propagating in an electromagnetic field. Maxwell's theory predicted that the speed of the ripple was a quite definite number: c." Pentcho Valev wrote: 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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen
George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity." Crimestop in Einsteiniana: John Norton stops short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of two dangerous thoughts: (1) The car can be much longer than the garage and yet be trapped inside if Einstein's 1905 false light postulate were true; (2) The car is not necessarily able to break and burst through the closed door. So Norton converts the absurdity (even idiocy) into an example of the glorious achievements of Divine Albert's Divine Theory: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ity/index.html John Norton: "Here is how we might try to get a contradiction out of the relativistic effect of each observer judging the other to have shrunk. Imagine a car that fits perfectly into a garage. The garage is a small free standing shed that is just as long as the car. There is a door at the right and a door at the left of the garage. The car fits exactly--as long as it is at rest. Now image that we drive the car at 86.6% speed of light through the garage from right to left. The doors have been opened at the right and the left of the garage to allow passage of the car. There is a garage attendant, who stands at rest with respect to the garage. Can the garage attendant close both doors so that, at least for a few brief moments, the car is fully enclosed within the garage? According to the garage attendant, there is no problem achieving this. At 86.6% the speed of light, the car has shrunk to half of its length at rest. It fits in the garage handily. The garage attendant can close both doors and trap the car inside. (...) The car driver and the garage attendant disagree on whether the car is ever fully enclosed in the garage simply because they disagree on the time order of two events. (...) Therefore there is no observer independent fact as to whether the car was ever fully enclosed in the garage." Sillier Einsteinians do not see the absurdity (idiocy) and expose it in all its ugliness. Luckily (for them) the postscientific world does not give a sh.. about rationality in science: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html "These are the props. You own a barn, 40m long, with automatic doors at either end, that can be opened and closed simultaneously by a switch. You also have a pole, 80m long, which of course won't fit in the barn. Now someone takes the pole and tries to run (at nearly the speed of light) through the barn with the pole horizontal. Special Relativity (SR) says that a moving object is contracted in the direction of motion: this is called the Lorentz Contraction. So, if the pole is set in motion lengthwise, then it will contract in the reference frame of a stationary observer.....So, as the pole passes through the barn, there is an instant when it is completely within the barn. At that instant, you close both doors simultaneously, with your switch. Of course, you open them again pretty quickly, but at least momentarily you had the contracted pole shut up in your barn. The runner emerges from the far door unscathed.....If the doors are kept shut the rod will obviously smash into the barn door at one end. If the door withstands this the leading end of the rod will come to rest in the frame of reference of the stationary observer. There can be no such thing as a rigid rod in relativity so the trailing end will not stop immediately and the rod will be compressed beyond the amount it was Lorentz contracted. If it does not explode under the strain and it is sufficiently elastic it will come to rest and start to spring back to its natural shape but since it is too big for the barn the other end is now going to crash into the back door and the rod will be trapped in a compressed state inside the barn." Pentcho Valev wrote: Doublethink again: http://july.fixedreference.org/en/20...iferous_aether "Other than its apparently unusual mechanical properties, the existence of a medium for light should mean that the velocity of light would be relative to the medium, so that a moving observer would see an altered velocity of light, but this was not consistent with later experiments. More concretely, Maxwell's equations required that all electromagnetic waves in vacuum propagate at a fixed speed, c." THE TRUTH is that, for all etherists including Maxwell: "a moving observer would see an altered velocity of light". Note the idiotic "More concretely" above, followed by THE LIE (which is always one leap ahead of THE TRUTH): "Maxwell's equations required that all electromagnetic waves in vacuum propagate at a fixed speed, c". In this particular case of doublethink John Norton finds THE TRUTH (that the speed of light is variable for a moving observer, both in Newton's emission theory of light and in Maxwell's ether theory) too dangerous so he teaches THE LIE, THE WHOLE LIE AND NOTHING BUT THE LIE: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ics/index.html John Norton: "Why Einstein should believe the light postulate is a little harder to see. We would expect that a light signal would slow down relative to us if we chased after it. The light postulate says no. No matter how fast an inertial observer is traveling in pursuit of the light signal, that observer will always see the light signal traveling at the same speed, c. The principal reason for his acceptance of the light postulate was his lengthy study of electrodynamics, the theory of electric and magnetic fields. The theory was the most advanced physics of the time. Some 50 years before, Maxwell had shown that light was merely a ripple propagating in an electromagnetic field. Maxwell's theory predicted that the speed of the ripple was a quite definite number: c." Pentcho Valev wrote: 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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
Einsteiniana's superluminal idiocy:
http://www.physorg.com/news182671620.html "...the group velocity of the pulse can increase to a velocity greater than any of the waves within the pulse, but the energy of the pulse still travels at the speed of light, which means information is transmitted in accordance with Einstein's theory. (...) The faster- than-light pulses do not violate Einstein's theory because technically the pulse carries no information. The effect has been known in laboratory experiments, but these observations were the first in an astrophysical context." Pentcho Valev |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
Unlimited madness in Einsteiniana:
http://www.trinitynews.ie/index.php/...-clock-blocked "The alternative explanation for the series of unfortunate events that have befallen the LHC is hardly less bizarre. Two otherwise respected physicists are now claiming that the much hypothesized Higgs Boson particle might have a "backward causation" effect to stop itself being discovered. In other words, the particle does not wish to be created, or its creation would have such cataclysmic results that the actual universe itself does not wish for it to be created. Thus, at the moment that it is created in the future, forces travel back in time to sabotage the collider before it gets the chance to be made. In pop culture terms, this is basically what happens in Back to the Future, when Marty McFly travels back in time and accidentally erases his future self by stopping his parents from falling in love. (...) The only problem is that the future has cursed the project. The hypothesis seems so bizarre as to be laughable, but for the fact that it is supported by two leading physicists, Holger Bech Nielsen, of the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, and Masao Ninomiya of the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto, Japan. They have postulated this idea over the last two years, publishing it in a series of scientific papers with titles such as "Test of Effect From Future in Large Hadron Collider: a Proposal". (...) But perhaps we should not mock these theories. After all, Einstein himself wrote, "for those of us who believe in physics, this separation between past, present and future is only an illusion"." In Einsteiniana, time is an illusion because Divine Albert said so (and because this follows from Einstein's 1905 false light postulate). Yet clever Einsteinians make career and money by teaching that time is not an illusion: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodie...age/index.html John Norton: "A common belief among philosophers of physics is that the passage of time of ordinary experience is merely an illusion. The idea is seductive since it explains away the awkward fact that our best physical theories of space and time have yet to capture this passage. I urge that we should resist the idea. We know what illusions are like and how to detect them. Passage exhibits no sign of being an illusion....Following from the work of Einstein, Minkowski and many more, physics has given a wonderfully powerful conception of space and time. Relativity theory, in its most perspicacious form, melds space and time together to form a four-dimensional spacetime. The study of motion in space and and all other processes that unfold in them merely reduce to the study of an odd sort of geometry that prevails in spacetime. In many ways, time turns out to be just like space. In this spacetime geometry, there are differences between space and time. But a difference that somehow captures the passage of time is not to be found. There is no passage of time. There are temporal orderings. We can identify earlier and later stages of temporal processes and everything in between. What we cannot find is a passing of those stages that recapitulates the presentation of the successive moments to our consciousness, all centered on the one preferred moment of "now." At first, that seems like an extraordinary lacuna. It is, it would seem, a failure of our best physical theories of time to capture one of time's most important properties. However the longer one works with the physics, the less worrisome it becomes....I was, I confess, a happy and contented believer that passage is an illusion. It did bother me a little that we seemed to have no idea of just how the news of the moments of time gets to be rationed to consciousness in such rigid doses.....Now consider the passage of time. Is there a comparable reason in the known physics of space and time to dismiss it as an illusion? I know of none. The only stimulus is a negative one. We don't find passage in our present theories and we would like to preserve the vanity that our physical theories of time have captured all the important facts of time. So we protect our vanity by the stratagem of dismissing passage as an illusion." Pentcho Valev |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
SAD EINSTEIN STUFF
Pentcho Valev wrote:
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://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. Again, this phenomenon is due to the fact that the source and the observer are not the in the same frame of reference." Both authors suffer the same madness. In the end they subconsciously reject the obvious truth - that the moving observer finds the speed of the wave to have increased - and save Divine Albert's Divine Theory by advancing a blatant lie to the effect that the moving observer finds the wavelength to have decreased. George Orwell calls this "doublethink": http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com...html#seventeen George Orwell: "It need hardly be said that the subtlest practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society, those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more intelligent, the less sane." Pentcho Valev |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
MADNESS IN EINSTEINIANA
I would say that the LHC or its omnipotent caretakeers had
to take a few pages out of its flip-book -- just rip them right out & shred, like the Royal Astronomer would try to do to yours, if you were to question the Reality Bumpersticker. rigid doses.....Now consider the passage of time. Is there a comparable reason in the known physics of space and time to dismiss it as an illusion? I know of none. The only stimulus is a negative one. --les OEuvres! http://wlym.com |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DOUBLETHINK IN EINSTEINIANA | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 15 | August 19th 09 10:01 AM |
EINSTEINIANA IN DESPAIR | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 2 | April 26th 09 07:50 AM |
EINSTEINIANA IN PANIC | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 22 | December 28th 08 02:52 AM |
THE POWER OF EINSTEINIANA | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 24 | December 23rd 08 09:41 AM |
EINSTEINIANA AS PARODY | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | August 5th 08 07:17 AM |