|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEINIANS AS MARAUDERS
Einsteiniana's marauders know no limits:
Joao Magueijo, PLUS VITE QUE LA LUMIERE, Dunod, 2003, p. 50: "En cours de route, en 1911, Einstein proposa même une théorie où la vitesse de la lumière variait! Aujourd'hui, les scientifiques sont soit horrifiés par cette article écrit par le grand Albert Einstein, alors professeur à Prague, soit tout simplement ignorants de son existence. Banesh Hoffmann, collègue et biographe d'Einstein, décrit ce texte de la manière suivante: "Et cela signifie... Quoi? Que la vitesse de la lumière n'est pas constante, que la gravitation la ralentit. Hérésie! Et de la part d'Einstein lui-même." Pentcho Valev wrote: Theoretical physics has been schizophrenic for a long time but still from time to time a reasonable question surprises Einsteiniana's marauders. They don't reply or give an answer as idiotic as possible: http://www.usatoday.com/weather/reso...photonmass.htm "Question: Do photons have mass? If not, why does the gravitational field of a star bend passing light? "A particle like a photon is never at rest and always moves at the speed of light; thus it is massless," says Dr. Michael S. Turner, chair of the Department of Astrophysics at the University of Chicago." This Turner surely knows that in 1911 Einstein showed that the speed of a photon varies with the gravitational potential exactly as the speed of a cannonball does, in accordance with Newton's emission theory of light. Then in 1915 Einstein found it profitable to discover that the speed of the photon is even more variable but in any case Turner's statement "a photon...always moves at the speed of light" is a blatant lie. According to Einstein's relativity, a photon NEVER moves at the speed of light in a gravitational field: 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.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." http://www.mathpages.com/rr/s6-01/6-01.htm "In geometrical units we define c_0 = 1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be written simply as c=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915 and the completion of the general theory. In fact, the general theory of relativity doesn't give any equation for the speed of light at a particular location, because the effect of gravity cannot be represented by a simple scalar field of c values. Instead, the "speed of light" at a each point depends on the direction of the light ray through that point, as well as on the choice of coordinate systems, so we can't generally talk about the value of c at a given point in a non- vanishing gravitational field. However, if we consider just radial light rays near a spherically symmetrical (and non- rotating) mass, and if we agree to use a specific set of coordinates, namely those in which the metric coefficients are independent of t, then we can read a formula analogous to Einstein's 1911 formula directly from the Schwarzschild metric. (...) In the Newtonian limit the classical gravitational potential at a distance r from mass m is phi=-m/r, so if we let c_r = dr/dt denote the radial speed of light in Schwarzschild coordinates, we have c_r =1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term." http://www.speed-light.info/speed_of_light_variable.htm "Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German (download from: http://www.physik.uni-augsburg.de/an...35_898-908.pdf ). It predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. You can find an English translation of this paper in the Dover book 'The Principle of Relativity' beginning on page 99; 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+phi/c^2) where phi is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light co is measured......You can find a more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from the full theory of general relativity in the weak field approximation....For the 1955 results but not in coordinates see page 93, eqn (6.28): c(r)=[1+2phi(r)/c^2]c. Namely the 1955 approximation shows a variation in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in 1911." Pentcho Valev |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEINIANS AS MARAUDERS
Einsteiniana's marauders destroy the scientific rationality by first
teaching idiocies, then denouncing the idiocies, then teaching the same idiocies again. Examples of "denouncing the idiocies": http://www.tgdaily.com/general-scien...t-exist-at-all "Dark matter and dark energy may not exist at all. Everything we know about the composition of the universe may be wrong, according to physicists." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6...-be-wrong.html Martin Rees: "Over the past week, two stories in the press have suggested that scientists have been very wrong about some very big issues. First, a new paper seemed to suggest that dark energy the mysterious force that makes up three quarters of the universe, and is pushing the galaxies further apart might not even exist." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/26/science/26essay.html "The worrying continued. Lawrence Krauss, a cosmologist from Arizona State, said that most theories were wrong. "We get the notions they are right because we keep talking about them," he said. Not only are most theories wrong, he said, but most data are also wrong..." http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scienc.../87150187.html "Dark Energy: The Biggest Mystery in the Universe (...) "We have a complete inventory of the universe," Sean Carroll, a California Institute of Technology cosmologist, has said, "and it makes no sense." Thid does not necessarily mean that Einsteiniana's marauders are bad people. Billions can only come when rationality is destroyed and the scientific community is unable to react. Nothing personal, just business: http://www.physorg.com/news179508040.html "More than a dozen ground-based Dark Energy projects are proposed or under way, and at least four space-based missions, each of the order of a billion dollars, are at the design concept stage." Pentcho Valev |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
EINSTEINIANS AS MARAUDERS
Einsteiniana's marauders combining science and cultu
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/cu...o-science.html "Now physicist Brian Greene has left hard data and cryptic equations behind to venture into classical mythology, reimagining the Greek story of Icarus, the boy who flew too close to the sun. In 2008, Greene came out with an illustrated book version of Icarus at the Edge of Time (watch New Scientist's video interview with Greene about the book). Last week, the full multimedia musical premiered at the third annual World Science Festival in New York. The Festival itself is a project created by Greene and his wife that seeks to combine science and culture. (...) Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that for someone approaching a black hole, time slows down relative to the external universe. Greene uses this concept of "time dilation" to help Icarus avoid death." http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardia...cist-brian-cox "...presenter and particle physicist Brian Cox snuggling down on to the floor of Death Valley with an umbrella, a can of water, and a thermometer, and proving (after Herschel) just how hot the sun actually is. Suffused in smiles, he punched the umbrella bashfully into the sand. "And that's why I love physics." (...) ...the general theory of relativity was a genuine aesthetic choice, really. There was no experimental justification for going beyond Newton's laws of gravity. It was purely aesthetic. "But it predicts things. I find it amazing, for example, that you get binary pulsars" – a kind of small but dense star - "orbiting around each other a thousand times a second – the most violent thing you can imagine, churning up space and time. And you make measurements with radio telescopes, and you get the answer that Einstein's theory predicts - and he wrote that in 1915, when he didn't know about pulsars, and he didn't know about radio telescopes. But you're right - a good scientist, a really pure scientist, would have to accept that that constant drive to unify forces together and to find a simpler, more economical description of nature, is really a choice - it's an act of - I was going to say an act of faith, but that makes it sound mystical, and there's nothing mystical about science actually." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1ExiJKbeuY Prof Brian Cox explores Einstein's understanding of time http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiSpNh_e-0o&NR=1 Prof Brian Cox explores Time in super slow motion http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...cle1985696.ece "They call me the Liam Gallagher of physics. (...) But now consider Professor Brian Cox, the 40-year-old who's turning the image of physics on its head. He's the bloke who used to play keyboards in D:Ream, the dance-rock band behind New Labour's anthem Things Can Only Get Better. He cites Einstein as his inspiration, the No1 daddy of physics who was actually a bit cooler than we think (...) He says: "Close to the speed of light, you can go anywhere you want in the future. You can get as far into the future as you want. That's just orthodox. It was known in 1905." And get this..."If you go on a flight to New York then come back again, you'll have aged slightly less than the people who stayed here because you've gone into the future slower!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b558k...C0155A9 09EEF Silly Walks Applicant: "Well sir, I have a silly walk and I'd like to obtain a Government grant to help me develop it....I think that with Government backing I could make it very silly." Silly Walks Director: "Mr Pudey, the very real problem is one of money. I'm afraid that the Ministry of Silly Walks is no longer getting the kind of support it needs. You see there's Defence, Social Security, Health, Housing, Education, Silly Walks ... they're all supposed to get the same. But last year, the Government spent less on the Ministry of Silly Walks than it did on National Defence! Now we get 348,000,000 a year, which is supposed to be spent on all our available products." Pentcho Valev |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
HOW BLATANTLY EINSTEINIANS CAN LIE | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 10 | March 16th 10 02:49 PM |
HUMILIATED EINSTEINIANS | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 22 | February 12th 09 07:02 AM |
WHERE ARE THE EINSTEINIANS? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 28 | November 16th 08 02:52 AM |
DESPERATE EINSTEINIANS | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | October 4th 08 02:17 AM |
EINSTEINIANS KNOW NO LIMITS | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 13 | May 28th 08 01:02 AM |