A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Einsteinian Neil deGrasse Tyson blames U.S. schools for flat-Earthers



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 22nd 17, 08:19 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einsteinian Neil deGrasse Tyson blames U.S. schools for flat-Earthers

"Neil deGrasse Tyson, perhaps the most famous astrophysicist in the world and a seemingly affable guy, upset teachers and started something of a Twitter frenzy with a tweet blaming U.S. schools for people who believe the world is flat." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-arent-amused/

Teachers are innocent. The blame should be put on Neil deGrasse Tyson himself and brothers Einsteinians who, for more than a century, have been destroying human rationality by teaching idiocies like this one:

Neil deGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries, pp. 123-124: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is A COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER." https://www.amazon.com/Death-Black-H.../dp/039335038X

If we have to choose between the flat-earth idea and the idea of "a cosmic conspiracy of the highest order", I think the former is less detrimental to sanity. So some day flat-Earthers will naturally come to power in science, as people less insane than Einsteinians.

The speed of light is variable, not constant, and this is obvious. Consider the following setup:

A light source emits a series of pulses equally distanced from one another. A stationary observer (receiver) measures the speed of the pulses to be c and the frequency to be f=c/d, where d is the distance between the pulses:

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ler_static.gif

The observer starts moving with constant speed v (v c) towards the light source - the frequency he measures shifts from f=c/d to f'=(c+v)/d:

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ector_blue.gif

The following formula is correct:

f' = c'/d

where c' is the speed of the pulses as measured by the moving observer. Clearly,

c' = c + v.

That is, the speed of the pulses varies with the speed of the observer, in violation of Einstein's relativity. Any correct interpretation of the Doppler effect unavoidably leads to the same conclusion:

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "In this particular animation

http://www.einstein-online.info/imag...ector_blue.gif

which has the receiver moving towards the source at one third the speed of the pulses themselves, four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses." [end of quotation]

Since "four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", the speed of the pulses relative to the receiver (observer) is greater than their speed relative to the source, in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old July 22nd 17, 03:44 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einsteinian Neil deGrasse Tyson blames U.S. schools for flat-Earthers

How about trapping a 5 km long rod inside a 1 cm long container? Flat-Earthers are horrified but Einsteinians know how to perform such miracles and accordingly sing "Divine Einstein", "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity", and "The faster you move, the heavier you get" (gradually the ecstasy gets uncontrollable - Einsteinians tumble to the floor, start tearing their clothes and go into convulsions).

Yes, Divine Albert's Divine Theory predicts that unlimitedly long objects can gloriously be trapped inside unlimitedly short containers:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...barn_pole.html
John Baez: "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. [...] 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. [...] 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."

See, at 7:12 in the video below, how the train is trapped "in a compressed state" inside the tunnel:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrqj88zQZJg
"Einstein's Relativistic Train in a Tunnel Paradox: Special Relativity"

It is not difficult to realize that trapping unlimitedly long objects inside unlimitedly short containers implies unlimited compressibility and drastically violates the law of conservation of energy. The unlimitedly compressed object, in trying to restore its original volume ("spring back to its natural shape"), would produce an enormous amount of work the energy for which comes from nowhere.

At 9:01 in the above video Sarah sees the train falling through the hole, and in order to save Einstein's relativity, the authors of the video inform the gullible world that Adam as well sees the train falling through the hole. However Adam can only see this if the train undergoes an absurd bending first, as shown at 9:53 in the video and in this pictu

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...iation.svg.png

Clearly we have reductio ad absurdum: An absurd bending is required - it does occur in Adam's reference frame but doesn't in Sarah's. Conclusion: The underlying premise, Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, is false.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old July 22nd 17, 07:59 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einsteinian Neil deGrasse Tyson blames U.S. schools for flat-Earthers

"Fed Up With Trump's Lies, Neil deGrasse Tyson... [...] ...he said of science: "It is true whether or not you believe it. The sooner you understand that, the faster we can get on with the political conversations about how to solve the problems that face us."
http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/2...d-republicans/

Science is not always true, Neil deGrasse Tyson. Sometimes it is both fraudulent and idiotic, as in this case:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2s1-RHuljo
Neil deGrasse Tyson: "One of the towering great achievements of the human mind in our understanding of the universe is Einstein's theories of relativity. [...] It makes only two assumptions... [...] Given those two tenets, extraordinary spooky phenomena derive from them. For example: As you travel faster [...] time ticks MORE SLOWLY for you than it does for other people who are not."

You are lying, Neil deGrasse Tyson. Time does not tick MORE SLOWLY for the moving observer. According to special relativity, time ticks FASTER for the moving observer:

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf
David Morin, Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back. [...] For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B does observe A's clock running slow..."

http://topquark.hubpages.com/hub/Twin-Paradox
"The situation is that a man sets off in a rocket travelling at high speed away from Earth, whilst his twin brother stays on Earth. [...] ...the twin in the spaceship considers himself to be the stationary twin, and therefore as he looks back towards Earth he sees his brother ageing more slowly than himself."

Why are you lying so blatantly, Neil deGrasse Tyson?

Pentcho Valev
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Denial of Neil deGrasse Tyson's Science Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 April 24th 17 06:58 PM
NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON DISHONEST OR JUST SILLY? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 August 6th 15 12:14 PM
Neil (EGO) Degrasse Tyson STEALS directly from Sagan RichA[_6_] Amateur Astronomy 4 April 17th 15 09:38 AM
NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON : CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 July 14th 14 04:32 PM
'My Favorite Universe' (Neil deGrasse Tyson) M Dombek UK Astronomy 1 December 29th 05 12:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.