PHYSICS EDUCATION BASED ON DOUBLETHINK

THE TRUTH: Light accelerates in a gravitational field:

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/hsr1...notes12_02.pdf
Harvey Reall, University of Cambridge: "...light falls in the
gravitational field in exactly the same way as a massive test
particle."

http://membres.multimania.fr/juvastr...s/einstein.pdf
"Le principe d'équivalence, un des fondements de base de la relativité
générale prédit que dans un champ gravitationnel, la lumière tombe
comme tout corps matériel selon l'acceleration de la pesanteur."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNWngpw2vr0
Brian Cox: "Light falls at the same rate in a gravitational field as
everything else."

http://www.wfu.edu/~brehme/space.htm
Robert W. Brehme: "Light falls in a gravitational field just as do
material objects."

THE LIE ("always one leap ahead of the truth"): Light does not
accelerate in a gravitational field:

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-S.../dp/0306817586
Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?), Brian Cox, Jeff Forshaw,
p. 236: "If the light falls in strict accord with the principle of
equivalence, then, as it falls, its energy should increase by exactly
the same fraction that it increases for any other thing we could
imagine dropping. We need to know what happens to the light as it
gains energy. In other words, what can Pound and Rebka expect to see
at the bottom of their laboratory when the dropped light arrives?
There is only one way for the light to increase its energy. We know
that it cannot speed up, because it is already traveling at the
universal speed limit, but it can increase its frequency."

An education based on doublethink is much more detrimental than an
education that just teaches falsehood. Even exceptionally rational
minds quickly disintegrate when persistently taught that two and two
make five, then four, then five again etc.

Pentcho Valev

Silly Einsteinians are unable to practice doublethink - they just
teach lies. The Michelson-Morley experiment has gloriously confirmed
the principle of constancy of the speed of light and that's it and yes
we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Students learn
the lie by rote, become professors, teach the lie to their students
and so the money-spinner works in a continuous mode. Rational minds
are paralysed but not irreversibly destroyed. Paradoxically, the
irreversible destruction occurs when clever Einsteinians start
teaching the truth as part of their doublethink campaign:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/companion.doc
John Norton: "These efforts were long misled by an exaggeration of the
importance of one experiment, the Michelson-Morley experiment, even
though Einstein later had trouble recalling if he even knew of the
experiment prior to his 1905 paper. This one experiment, in isolation,
has little force. Its null result happened to be fully compatible with
Newton's own emission theory of light. Located in the context of late
19th century electrodynamics when ether-based, wave theories of light
predominated, however, it presented a serious problem that exercised
the greatest theoretician of the day."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers
in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues
that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of
light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the
Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of
relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support
for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point
needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible
with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."

Juxtaposing the century of fraudulent literature where the lie is
repeted millions of times with John Norton's revelations is fatal for
rational minds - they disintegrate irreversibly and succumb to
Einsteiniana's bellicose zombies.

Pentcho Valev

THE TRUTH: Insofar as its speed is concerned, light behaves like
particles, that is, the speed of light varies with both the speed of
the emitter and the gravitational potential just as the speed of
cannonballs does. In 1887 (the ad hoc length-contraction hypothesis is
not advanced yet) the Michelson-Morley experiment UNEQUIVOCALLY
confirmed the variation of the speed of light predicted by Newton's
emission theory:

http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its.../dp/0486406768
Relativity and Its Roots, Banesh Hoffmann: "Moreover, if light
consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper
submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle
seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more
damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle
is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we
take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles
obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus
automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley
experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or
Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the
temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of
light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his
second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought
of in terms of waves in an ether."

THE FUNDAMENTAL LIE in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world: The
Michelson-Morley experiment gloriously confirmed the principle of
constancy of the speed of light:

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Faster Than the Speed of Light, Joao Magueijo: "A missile fired from a
plane moves faster than one fired from the ground because the plane's
speed adds to the missile's speed. If I throw something forward on a
moving train, its speed with respect to the platform is the speed of
that object plus that of the train. You might think that the same
should happen to light: Light flashed from a train should travel
faster. However, what the Michelson-Morley experiments showed was that
this was not the case: Light always moves stubbornly at the same
speed. This means that if I take a light ray and ask several observers
moving with respect to each other to measure the speed of this light
ray, they will all agree on the same apparent speed!"

http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-mc2-S.../dp/0306817586
Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?), Brian Cox, Jeff Forshaw,
p. 91: "...Maxwell's brilliant synthesis of the experimental results
of Faraday and others strongly suggested that the speed of light
should be the same for all observers. This conclusion was supported by
the experimental result of Michelson and Morley, and taken at face
value by Einstein."

http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-.../dp/0553380168
Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Chapter 2: "The special
theory of relativity was very successful in explaining that the speed
of light appears the same to all observers (as shown by the Michelson-
Morley experiment) and in describing what happens when things move at
speeds close to the speed of light."

Pentcho Valev