

Thread Tools  Display Modes 
#1




HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
If the observer suddenly starts moving towards the light source, the
frequency of light increases (Doppler effect). This has a SIMPLE IMPLICATION: the wavecrests are now bumping more frequently into the observer, that is, THE SPEED OF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER HAS INCREASED. "But this is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory"  say to themselves Einsteiniana's teachers and replace the SIMPLE IMPLICATION with an IDIOTIC ONE: 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)." If Einsteinians want to leave their schizophrenic world, they should return to the SIMPLE IMPLICATION by realizing that the wavelength is determined by the light source and cannot depend on the movements of the observer. By the way, John Baez, Einsteiniana's most famous teacher, has already left Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world: http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity." Pentcho Valev 
#2




HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ... If the observer suddenly starts moving towards the light source, the frequency of light increases (Doppler effect). This has a SIMPLE IMPLICATION: the wavecrests are now bumping more frequently into the observer, that is, THE SPEED OF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER HAS INCREASED. No, the measured wavelength decreases by exactly the same amount. You really need to read some simple introduction to relativity targeted at people with only limited knowledge of physics and maths. Einstein himself wrote such a book, as have many other people. There is no point in you trying to understand the finer points of relativity when you don't even know the basics. 
#3




HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
On Jul 18, 7:03 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
If the observer suddenly starts moving towards the light source, the frequency of light increases (Doppler effect). This has a SIMPLE IMPLICATION: the wavecrests are now bumping more frequently into the observer, that is, THE SPEED OF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER HAS INCREASED. "But this is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory"  say to themselves Einsteiniana's teachers and replace the SIMPLE IMPLICATION with an IDIOTIC ONE: 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)." If Einsteinians want to leave their schizophrenic world, they should return to the SIMPLE IMPLICATION by realizing that the wavelength is determined by the light source and cannot depend on the movements of the observer. By the way, John Baez, Einsteiniana's most famous teacher, has already left Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world: http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity." Einsteinians who want to leave Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should also consider this: 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 (NONINERTIAL) 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." and ask the question: If the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+V/c^2), how does it vary with the relative speed v of the light source (at the moment of emission) and an observer belonging to an ACCELERATING (NON INERTIAL) FRAME OF REFERENCE (at the moment of reception)? They could solve the problem in the following way: A light source on top of a tower of height h emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver on the ground receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. Einstein's 1911 solution gives: f'=f(1+gh/c^2); c'=c(1+gh/c^2); L'=L A rocket of length h accelerates with acceleration g. A light source at the front end emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver at the back end receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. At the moment of reception, the receiver has speed v relative to the light source at the moment of emission. Einstein's equivalence principle gives: f'=f(1+v/c); c'=c+v; L'=L Clearly, Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should be abandoned. Pentcho Valev 
#4




HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
If the observer suddenly starts moving towards the light source, the
frequency of light increases (Doppler effect). This has a SIMPLE IMPLICATION: the wavecrests are now bumping more frequently into the observer, that is, THE SPEED OF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER HAS INCREASED. "But this is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory"  say to themselves Einsteiniana's teachers and replace the SIMPLE IMPLICATION with an IDIOTIC ONE: 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)." If Einsteinians want to leave their schizophrenic world, they should return to the SIMPLE IMPLICATION by realizing that the wavelength is determined by the light source and cannot depend on the movements of the observer. By the way, John Baez, Einsteiniana's most famous teacher, has already left Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world: http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity." Einsteinians who want to leave Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should also consider this: 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 (NONINERTIAL) 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." and ask the question: If the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+V/c^2), how does it vary with the relative speed v of the light source (at the moment of emission) and an observer belonging to an ACCELERATING (NON INERTIAL) FRAME OF REFERENCE (at the moment of reception)? They could solve the problem in the following way: A light source on top of a tower of height h emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver on the ground receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. Einstein's 1911 solution gives: f'=f(1+gh/c^2); c'=c(1+gh/c^2); L'=L A rocket of length h accelerates with acceleration g. A light source at the front end emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver at the back end receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. At the moment of reception, the receiver has speed v relative to the light source at the moment of emission. Einstein's equivalence principle gives: f'=f(1+v/c); c'=c+v; L'=L Clearly, Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should be abandoned. Perhaps Einsteinians CANNOT leave their schizophrenic world but they could at least stop destroying children's rationality in this way: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/specrel/lc.cfm A high school physics tutorial: "One of the peculiar aspects of Einstein's theory of special relativity is that the length of objects moving at relativistic speeds undergoes a contraction along the dimension of motion. An observer at rest (relative to the moving object) would observe the moving object to be shorter in length. That is to say, that an object at rest might be measured to be 200 feet long; yet the same object when moving at relativistic speeds relative to the observer/measurer would have a measured length which is less than 200 ft. This phenomenon is not due to actual errors in measurement or faulty observations. The object is actually contracted in length as seen from the stationary reference frame. The amount of contraction of the object is dependent upon the object's speed relative to the observer." The object cannot be "actually contracted" because this would allow Einsteinians to trap it inside a short container and the implications are more than absurd. See even more absurdity he http://www.labnews.co.uk/laboratory_...larofphysics Pentcho Valev 
#5




HOW EINSTEINIANS CAN LEAVE THEIR SCHIZOPHRENIC WORLD
"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message ... On Jul 18, 7:03 am, Pentcho Valev wrote: If the observer suddenly starts moving towards the light source, the frequency of light increases (Doppler effect). This has a SIMPLE IMPLICATION: the wavecrests are now bumping more frequently into the observer, that is, THE SPEED OF LIGHT RELATIVE TO THE OBSERVER HAS INCREASED. "But this is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory"  say to themselves Einsteiniana's teachers and replace the SIMPLE IMPLICATION with an IDIOTIC ONE: 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)." If Einsteinians want to leave their schizophrenic world, they should return to the SIMPLE IMPLICATION by realizing that the wavelength is determined by the light source and cannot depend on the movements of the observer. By the way, John Baez, Einsteiniana's most famous teacher, has already left Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world: http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_5.html John Baez: "On the one hand we have the Standard Model, which tries to explain all the forces except gravity, and takes quantum mechanics into account. On the other hand we have General Relativity, which tries to explain gravity, and does not take quantum mechanics into account. Both theories seem to be more or less on the right track but until we somehow fit them together, or completely discard one or both, our picture of the world will be deeply schizophrenic.....I realized I didn't have enough confidence in either theory to engage in these heated debates. I also realized that there were other questions to work on: questions where I could actually tell when I was on the right track, questions where researchers cooperate more and fight less. So, I eventually decided to quit working on quantum gravity." Einsteinians who want to leave Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should also consider this: 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 (NONINERTIAL) FRAMES OF REFERENCE]. Yes. The speed of light is only a constant in an inertial reference frame, which in GR is freefall. 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." Yes, but now of course you are talking about general relativity. and ask the question: If the speed of light varies with the gravitational potential in accordance with the equation c'=c(1+V/c^2), how does it vary with the relative speed v of the light source (at the It doesn't. None of the equations you have posted say anything about the velocity of the emitter of the light,. moment of emission) and an observer belonging to an ACCELERATING (NON INERTIAL) FRAME OF REFERENCE (at the moment of reception)? They could solve the problem in the following way: Or, they might not. A light source on top of a tower of height h emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver on the ground receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. Einstein's 1911 solution gives: f'=f(1+gh/c^2); c'=c(1+gh/c^2); L'=L A rocket of length h accelerates with acceleration g. A light source at the front end emits light with frequency f, speed c (relative to the source) and wavelength L. A receiver at the back end receives light with frequency f', speed c' (relative to the receiver) and wavelength L'. At the moment of reception, the receiver has speed v relative to the light source at the moment of emission. Einstein's equivalence principle gives: f'=f(1+v/c); c'=c+v; L'=L You have conflated two different concepts. You have applied a formula from SR  which explicitly only applies within inertial frames of reference  and tried to use it on an accelerating rocket. In any event, the news that the speed of light in a vacuum depends upon the acceleration of the observer is hardly surprising, as the quotes you have provided show it is the basis of the whole idea of GR, and the nonconstancy of light speed is hardly that amazing, nothing else has constant speed in all frames of reference. Of course, this gravitational effect (or at least very closely related ones, such as gravitational redshift and lensing) is verified numerically every day in observatories world wide. HTH Peter Webb Clearly, Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world should be abandoned. Pentcho Valev 
Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
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 
deMonstrated scheme of a working monster perpetual motion machine toscientists, they stood like in MussoliniHitler government engaged in warfaresin the Arab world, called it a hoax, I spoke that it is based on dark matterand they told me to leave a  gb[_3_]  Astronomy Misc  5  May 8th 08 05:29 PM 