A RACE TO REFUTE RELATIVITY IN EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT

You don't need anything more elaborate than a filter.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html

The galaxy is turning but the arms do not align. The x-ray (blue)
travels faster than the IR (red).

The "Big Discovery" goes to Georges Sagnac in 1913.
Old physics is at work.







"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
:
http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?titl...&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
: Scientific American August 22, 2007 Hints of a breakdown of relativity
: theory? "The MAGIC gamma-ray telescope team has just released an eye-
: popping preprint (following up earlier work) describing what might be
: the first observational hint of quantum gravity. What they've seen is
: that higher-energy gamma rays appear to travel through space a little
: bit slower than lower-energy ones, contrary to one of the postulates
: underlying Einstein's special theory of relativity -- namely, that
: radiation travels through the vacuum at the same speed no matter
: what....The team ruled out the most obvious conventional effect, but
: will have to do more to prove that new physics is at work -- this is
: one of those "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"
: situations. But if the high-energy gammas really did lose the cosmic
: race, we're talking Big Discovery."
:
: Bravo Einsteinians bravo bravo bravo! Big Discovery and that's it!
: Money could only come from Big Discovery from now on, not from old
: miracles demonstrating how long trains are trapped inside short
: tunnels, how either clock runs slower than the other but when they
: meet one of them turns out to run faster and the respective twin is
: older etc. People do not care about those miracles anymore. They read
: Harry Potter.
:
: The situation is perfectly described by the martyr, Bryan Wallace:
:
: http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
: "There is a popular argument that the world's oldest profession is
: sexual prostitution. I think that it is far more likely that the
: oldest profession is scientific prostitution, and that it is still
: alive and well, and thriving in the 20th century. I suspect that long
: before sex had any commercial value, the prehistoric shamans used
: their primitive knowledge to acquire status, wealth, and political
: power, in much the same way as the dominant scientific and religious
: politicians of our time do. So in a sense, I tend to agree with
: Weart's argument that the earliest scientists were the prehistoric
: shamans, and the argument of Feyerabend that puts science on a par
: with religion and prostitution. I also tend to agree with the argument
: of Ellis that states that both science and theology have much in
: common, and both attempt to model reality on arguments based on
: unprovable articles of faith. Using the logic that if it looks like a
: duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, it must be a duck:
: I support the argument that since there is no significant difference
: between science and religion, science should be considered a religion!
: I would also agree with Ellis' argument of the obvious methodological
: differences between science and the other religions. The other
: dominant religions are static because their arguments are based on
: rigid doctrines set forth by their founders, such as Buddha, Jesus,
: and Muhammad, who have died long ago. Science on the other hand, is a
: dynamic religion that was developed by many men over a long period of
: time, and it has a flexible doctrine, the scientific method, that
: demands that the arguments change to conform to the evolving
: observational and experimental evidence. The word science was derived
: from the Latin word scientia, which means knowledge, so we see that
: the word, in essence, is just another word for knowledge. An associate
: of mine, Prof. Richard Rhodes II, a Professor of Physics at Eckerd
: College, once told me that students in his graduate school used to
: joke that Ph.D. stood for Piled higher and Deeper. If one considers
: the vast array of abstract theoretical garbage that dominates modern
: physics and astronomy, this appears to be an accurate description of
: the degree. Considering the results from Mahoney's field trial that
: showed Protestant ministers were two to three times more likely to use
: scientific methodology than Ph.D. scientists, it seems reasonable to
: consider that they have two to three times more right to be called
: scientists then the so-called Ph.D. scientists. I would agree with
: Popper's argument that observations are theory-laden, and there is no
: way to prove an argument beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt, but at
: the very least, the scientist should do more than pay lip service to
: the scientific method. The true scientist must have faith and believe
: in the scientific method of testing theories, and not in the theories
: themselves. I agree with Seeds argument that "A pseudoscience is
: something that pretends to be a science but does not obey the rules of
: good conduct common to all sciences." Because many of the dominant
: theories of our time do not follow the rules of science, they should
: more properly be labeled pseudoscience. The people who tend to believe
: more in theories than in the scientific method of testing theories,
: and who ignore the evidence against the theories they believe in,
: should be considered pseudoscientists and not true scientists. To the
: extent that the professed beliefs are based on the desire for status,
: wealth, or political reasons, these people are SCIENTIFIC
: PROSTITUTES."
:
: Pentcho Valev
:

On 23 Aug, 13:24, "Androcles" wrote:
You don't need anything more elaborate than a filter.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html

The galaxy is turning but the arms do not align. The x-ray (blue)
travels faster than the IR (red).

The "Big Discovery" goes to Georges Sagnac in 1913.
Old physics is at work.

Unfortunately NEW physics is at work, judging from what is published
in the journal "Physical Review":

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0822164415.htm
"Could Physicists Make A Time Machine? It All Depends On Curving Space-
time. Technion researchers have developed a theoretical model of a
time machine that, in the distant future, could possibly enable future
generations to travel into the past. "In order to travel back in time,
the spacetime structure must be engineered appropriately," explains
Prof. Amos Ori of the Technion's Faculty of Physics. "This is what
Einstein's theory of general relativity deals with.....The main
question is: if, according to the principles of curvature development
in the theory of relativity, can a time machine be created? In other
words, can we cause spacetime to curve in such a way as to enable
travel back in time?...Now, Prof. Ori is proposing a theoretical model
for spacetime that could develop into a time machine..... "The machine
is spacetime itself," he explains.....As an example, he brings up the
problem of instability according to which in spacetime with a time
machine there could be disturbances with increasing strength so that
spacetime would be disrupted to such an extent that it would cancel
out the time machine......An article on this model was published
recently in the journal "Physical Review."

Pentcho Valev

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
oups.com...
: On 23 Aug, 13:24, "Androcles" wrote:
: You don't need anything more elaborate than a filter.
: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070411.html
:
: The galaxy is turning but the arms do not align. The x-ray (blue)
: travels faster than the IR (red).
:
: The "Big Discovery" goes to Georges Sagnac in 1913.
: Old physics is at work.
:
: Unfortunately NEW physics is at work, judging from what is published
: in the journal "Physical Review":
:
: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0822164415.htm
: "Could Physicists Make A Time Machine? It All Depends On Curving Space-
: time. Technion researchers have developed a theoretical model of a
: time machine that, in the distant future, could possibly enable future
: generations to travel into the past. "In order to travel back in time,
: the spacetime structure must be engineered appropriately," explains
: Prof. Amos Ori of the Technion's Faculty of Physics. "This is what
: Einstein's theory of general relativity deals with.....The main
: question is: if, according to the principles of curvature development
: in the theory of relativity, can a time machine be created? In other
: words, can we cause spacetime to curve in such a way as to enable
: travel back in time?...Now, Prof. Ori is proposing a theoretical model
: for spacetime that could develop into a time machine..... "The machine
: is spacetime itself," he explains.....As an example, he brings up the
: problem of instability according to which in spacetime with a time
: machine there could be disturbances with increasing strength so that
: spacetime would be disrupted to such an extent that it would cancel
: out the time machine......An article on this model was published
: recently in the journal "Physical Review."
:
: Pentcho Valev

"New Technology Review" is laughing at "Physical Review",
for this reason:

'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO -- Albert Einstein,
who in 1895 failed an examination that would have allowed
him to study for a diploma as an electrical engineer at
the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule in Zurich
(couldn't even pass the SATs).

That ridiculous "definition" (actually a postulate, although without
any foundation) is the entire basis for meddling with time, but is kept
as a closely guarded secret by the dingleberries. Wackypedia
flatly refused to have it mentioned. Einstein's "genius" stems
for his reading of "The Time Machine" as a teenager instead
of studying, and his clerkship in the Swiss patent office looking
at patent applications for variations on cuckoo clocks.
His resentment at being turned down by Eidgenössische Technische
Hochschule ties in neatly with H.G. Well's publication in the same
year. It is recorded that his school teacher said he'd never amount to
anything, and so he played his prank upon the world.

http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/hgwells.htm

The way to stop the rot is to go directly to the source, point
out that Einstein's third postulate has no foundation and keep
on pointing it out, it is pure sci-fi, the goose that laid the
golden egg that will turn out to be an addled goose egg after all.

It is all very well to repeatedly say Einstein's junk is ridiculous but
we need to say WHY it is ridiculous as well. The interested
public are not aware of the secret third postulate, they only talk
of the first two, the second of which is pure, unadulterated
aether anyway.

"When you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter
how improbable, must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes (Arthur Conan Doyle).

The vector addition of light's velocity with its source velocity isn't
even improbable,
and all paradoxes in their myriad variations are as much sci-fi as the
theory.
All they do is point out "something" is wrong without saying what it
is.


The second "big discovery" goes to me, and that is fact, not boast.
As you know, I prefer to remain anonymous.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...lgol/Algol.htm