|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
18th century NORMALITY:
http://admin.wadsworth.com/resource_...Ch01-Essay.pdf Clifford Will, "THE RENAISSANCE OF GENERAL RELATIVITY": "The first glimmerings of the black hole idea date to the 18th century, in the writings of a British amateur astronomer, the Reverend John Michell. Reasoning on the basis of the corpuscular theory that light would be attracted by gravity, he noted that the speed of light emitted from the surface of a massive body would be reduced by the time the light was very far from the source. (Michell of course did not know special relativity.)" 21st century LUNACY: http://space.newscientist.com/articl...star-size.html "But light from the disc also loses energy - and is shifted to longer, redder wavelengths - because it has to work hard to escape the gravitational pull of the dense neutron star. This effect, called gravitational redshift, is predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity, which posits that gravity bends the fabric of space-time." Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
Einstein tries to save NORMALITY but fails:
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/homepa...ml#forthcoming "Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and the Problems in the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies that Led him to it." in Cambridge Companion to Einstein, M. Janssen and C. Lehner, eds., Cambridge University Press. Preprint. John Norton: "Einstein could not see how to formulate a fully relativistic electrodynamics merely using his new device of field transformations. So he considered the possibility of modifying Maxwell's electrodynamics in order to bring it into accord with an emission theory of light, such as Newton had originally conceived. There was some inevitability in these attempts, as long as he held to classical (Galilean) kinematics. Imagine that some emitter sends out a light beam at c. According to this kinematics, an observer who moves past at v in the opposite direction, will see the emitter moving at v and the light emitted at c+v. This last fact is the defining characteristic of an emission theory of light: the velocity of the emitter is added vectorially to the velocity of light emitted....If an emission theory can be formulated as a field theory, it would seem to be unable to determine the future course of processes from their state in the present. As long as Einstein expected a viable theory of light, electricity and magnetism to be a field theory, these sorts of objections would render an emission theory of light inadmissible." Einstein is sorry for the LUNACY he has introduced: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
On 5 Sept, 09:38, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Einstein tries to save NORMALITY but fails: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/homepa...ml#forthcoming "Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and the Problems in the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies that Led him to it." in Cambridge Companion to Einstein, M. Janssen and C. Lehner, eds., Cambridge University Press. Preprint. John Norton: "Einstein could not see how to formulate a fully relativistic electrodynamics merely using his new device of field transformations. So he considered the possibility of modifying Maxwell's electrodynamics in order to bring it into accord with an emission theory of light, such as Newton had originally conceived. There was some inevitability in these attempts, as long as he held to classical (Galilean) kinematics. Imagine that some emitter sends out a light beam at c. According to this kinematics, an observer who moves past at v in the opposite direction, will see the emitter moving at v and the light emitted at c+v. This last fact is the defining characteristic of an emission theory of light: the velocity of the emitter is added vectorially to the velocity of light emitted....If an emission theory can be formulated as a field theory, it would seem to be unable to determine the future course of processes from their state in the present. As long as Einstein expected a viable theory of light, electricity and magnetism to be a field theory, these sorts of objections would render an emission theory of light inadmissible." Einstein is sorry for the LUNACY he has introduced: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Hypocrisy combined with lunacy in Einstein zombie world: http://discovermagazine.com/2004/sep...tart:int=2&-C= Lee Smolin: "One way to understand this story is to say that theoretical physics has finally caught up to Einstein. While he was shunned in his Princeton years as he pursued the unified field theory, the Institute for Advanced Study, where he worked, is now filled with theorists who search for new variants of unified field theories. It is indeed a vindication of sorts for Einstein because much of what today's string theorists do in practice is play with unified theories of the kinds that Einstein and his few colleagues invented. The problem with this picture is that by the end of his life Einstein had to some extent abandoned his search for a unified field theory. He had failed to find a version of the theory that did what was most important to him, which is to explain quantum phenomena in a way that involved neither measurements nor statistics. In his last years he was moving on to something even more radical. He proposed giving up the idea that space and time are continuous. It is fair to say that while the idea that matter is made of atoms goes back at least to the Greeks, few before Einstein questioned the smoothness and continuity of space and time. To one friend, Walter Dallenbäch, he wrote, "The problem seems to me how one can formulate statements about a discontinuum without calling on a continuum as an aid; the latter should be banned from the theory as a supplementary construction not justified by the essence of the problem, which corresponds to nothing 'real.'"......Some string theorists will claim to be Einsteinians, and certainly Einstein would have approved of their search for a unification of physics. But here is how Brian Greene, in his most recent book, The Fabric of the Cosmos, describes the state of the field: "Even today, more than three decades after its initial articulation, most string practitioners believe we still don't have a comprehensive answer to the rudimentary question, What is string theory? Most researchers feel that our current formulation of string theory still lacks the kind of core principle we find at the heart of other major advances."....I think a sober assessment is that up till now, almost all of us who work in theoretical physics have failed to live up to Einstein's legacy. His demand for a coherent theory of principle was uncompromising. It has not been reached-not by quantum theory, not by special or general relativity, not by anything invented since. Einstein's moral clarity, his insistence that we should accept nothing less than a theory that gives a completely coherent account of individual phenomena, cannot be followed unless we reject almost all contemporary theoretical physics as insufficient.....Let us be frank and admit that most of us have neither the courage nor the patience to emulate Einstein. We should instead honor Einstein by asking whether we can do anything to ensure that in the future those few who do follow Einstein's path, who approach science as uncompromisingly as he did, have less risk of unemployment, the sort he suffered at the beginning of his career, and less risk of the marginalization he endured at the end. If we can do this, if we can make the path easier for those few who do follow him, we may make possible a revolution in science that even Einstein failed to achieve." Pentcho Valev |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
On 5 Sept, 09:38, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Einstein tries to save NORMALITY but fails: http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/homepa...ml#forthcoming "Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and the Problems in the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies that Led him to it." in Cambridge Companion to Einstein, M. Janssen and C. Lehner, eds., Cambridge University Press. Preprint. John Norton: "Einstein could not see how to formulate a fully relativistic electrodynamics merely using his new device of field transformations. So he considered the possibility of modifying Maxwell's electrodynamics in order to bring it into accord with an emission theory of light, such as Newton had originally conceived. There was some inevitability in these attempts, as long as he held to classical (Galilean) kinematics. Imagine that some emitter sends out a light beam at c. According to this kinematics, an observer who moves past at v in the opposite direction, will see the emitter moving at v and the light emitted at c+v. This last fact is the defining characteristic of an emission theory of light: the velocity of the emitter is added vectorially to the velocity of light emitted....If an emission theory can be formulated as a field theory, it would seem to be unable to determine the future course of processes from their state in the present. As long as Einstein expected a viable theory of light, electricity and magnetism to be a field theory, these sorts of objections would render an emission theory of light inadmissible." Einstein is sorry for the LUNACY he has introduced: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Hypocrisy combined with lunacy in Einstein zombie world: http://discovermagazine.com/2004/sep...tart:int=2&-C= Lee Smolin: "One way to understand this story is to say that theoretical physics has finally caught up to Einstein. While he was shunned in his Princeton years as he pursued the unified field theory, the Institute for Advanced Study, where he worked, is now filled with theorists who search for new variants of unified field theories. It is indeed a vindication of sorts for Einstein because much of what today's string theorists do in practice is play with unified theories of the kinds that Einstein and his few colleagues invented. The problem with this picture is that by the end of his life Einstein had to some extent abandoned his search for a unified field theory. He had failed to find a version of the theory that did what was most important to him, which is to explain quantum phenomena in a way that involved neither measurements nor statistics. In his last years he was moving on to something even more radical. He proposed giving up the idea that space and time are continuous. It is fair to say that while the idea that matter is made of atoms goes back at least to the Greeks, few before Einstein questioned the smoothness and continuity of space and time. To one friend, Walter Dallenbäch, he wrote, "The problem seems to me how one can formulate statements about a discontinuum without calling on a continuum as an aid; the latter should be banned from the theory as a supplementary construction not justified by the essence of the problem, which corresponds to nothing 'real.'"......Some string theorists will claim to be Einsteinians, and certainly Einstein would have approved of their search for a unification of physics. But here is how Brian Greene, in his most recent book, The Fabric of the Cosmos, describes the state of the field: "Even today, more than three decades after its initial articulation, most string practitioners believe we still don't have a comprehensive answer to the rudimentary question, What is string theory? Most researchers feel that our current formulation of string theory still lacks the kind of core principle we find at the heart of other major advances."....I think a sober assessment is that up till now, almost all of us who work in theoretical physics have failed to live up to Einstein's legacy. His demand for a coherent theory of principle was uncompromising. It has not been reached-not by quantum theory, not by special or general relativity, not by anything invented since. Einstein's moral clarity, his insistence that we should accept nothing less than a theory that gives a completely coherent account of individual phenomena, cannot be followed unless we reject almost all contemporary theoretical physics as insufficient.....Let us be frank and admit that most of us have neither the courage nor the patience to emulate Einstein. We should instead honor Einstein by asking whether we can do anything to ensure that in the future those few who do follow Einstein's path, who approach science as uncompromisingly as he did, have less risk of unemployment, the sort he suffered at the beginning of his career, and less risk of the marginalization he endured at the end. If we can do this, if we can make the path easier for those few who do follow him, we may make possible a revolution in science that even Einstein failed to achieve." Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
Pentcho Valev (or somebody else of the same name) wrote in message
. com: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Pentcho Valev And so AE realised that one of his babies (GR) which required continuous structures, was incompatible with the other (QM) which revolved around discontinuity. But let's not keep trying to knock GR and QM off their separate pedestals - they are wonderful theories within their own domains - but rather let's try to build a pedestal big enough for two. -- ξ Proud to be curly Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
18TH CENTURY NORMALITY, 21ST CENTURY LUNACY
On 9 Sept, 10:32, Prai Jei wrote:
Pentcho Valev (or somebody else of the same name) wrote in message . com: http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...0-433a-b7e3-4a... Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." Pentcho Valev And so AE realised that one of his babies (GR) which required continuous structures, was incompatible with the other (QM) which revolved around discontinuity. But let's not keep trying to knock GR and QM off their separate pedestals - they are wonderful theories within their own domains - but rather let's try to build a pedestal big enough for two. Something has been built already and you can even kiss it: http://starbulletin.com/2007/06/24/travel/story02.html "You can't sit on Lincoln's lap, but you can sit on Einstein ... and even give him a kiss on the cheek". Normal people should give Einstein a kiss on the cheek only but Einsteinians should kiss other parts of his body as well. Then Einsteinians should sing the hymn three times and go into convulsions in the end: http://www.bnl.gov/community/Tours/E.../Einsteine.jpg http://www.haverford.edu/physics-astro/songs/divine.htm http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-58/i...e_einstein.mp3 Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
21st century astronomy | oriel36 | UK Astronomy | 0 | February 5th 07 03:44 PM |