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

Einstein's Most Obvious Nonsense



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 19th 17, 07:54 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's Most Obvious Nonsense

Einstein's most obvious nonsense is undoubtedly his conclusion that the speed of light is independent of the motion of the observer, a direct consequence of his 1905 postulates. The observer starts moving towards the light source, the wavecrests start hitting him more frequently (the frequency he measures increases), and yet the speed of the wavecrests relative to the observer idiotically remains the same:

John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/...relativity.htm

Updated 2014 by Don Koks. Original by Steve Carlip (1997) and Philip Gibbs 1996: "To state that the speed of light is independent of the velocity of the observer is very counterintuitive. Some people even refuse to accept this as a logically consistent possibility, but in 1905 Einstein was able to show that it is perfectly consistent if you are prepared to give up assumptions about the absolute nature of space and time." http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic..._of_light.html

So Einstein "wrestled with this problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair", but in the end found it suitable to introduce the nonsense. However the nonsense naturally proved inconsistent with reality, and Einstein partially restored consistency by converting space and time, too, into nonsense:

Peter Galison: "Only by criticizing the foundational notions of time and space could one bring the pieces of the theory - that the laws of physics were the same in all constantly moving frames; that light traveled at the same speed regardless of its source - into harmony."
https://www.aip.org/history/exhibits...teins-time.htm

"Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime." http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/20...rs-of-gravity/

The most obvious nonsense (speed of light independent of motion of observer) is the first heavy blow on physics students's rationality:

Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morley experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding."
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einstein...eird_logic.htm

Joe Wolfe and other brainwashers will continue to teach nonsense, loudly and repeatedly - in the end students will become indistinguishable from Bingo the Clowno:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M
Bingo the Clowno

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old September 19th 17, 04:25 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's Most Obvious Nonsense

The fact that the speed of light VARIES with the speed of the observer is as obvious as 2+2=4 (Einstein's nonsensical conclusion that it doesn't is equivalent to Big Brother's 2+2=5):

http://a-levelphysicstutor.com/wav-doppler.php
"Vo is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocity is independent of the motion of the source. Hence, the velocity of waves relative to the observer is c + Vo. [...] The motion of an observer does not alter the wavelength. The increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE
"Doppler effect - when an observer moves toward a stationary source. When an observer moves toward a stationary source, the period of the wave emitted by a source is shorter and the observed frequency is higher. Because the velocity of the wave relative to the observer is faster than that when it is still."

All relevant experiments, if performed and interpreted correctly, confirm the variable speed of light posited by Newton's emission theory of light and refute the constant speed of light posited by Einstein's relativity. Even if the interpretation comes from the headquarters of Einstein cult, if it is correct, Einstein's relativity is (inadvertently) refuted:

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler
Albert Einstein Institute: "The frequency of a wave-like signal - such as sound or light - depends on the movement of the sender and of the receiver. This is known as the Doppler effect. [...] Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source:

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

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

By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, once more, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiver is somewhat higher than the frequency with which the pulses are sent out. This time, the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected, but still there is a frequency shift: As the receiver moves towards each pulse, the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened. In this particular animation, 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]

"Four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses" means that the speed of the pulses relative to the moving receiver is greater than their speed relative to the source, in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old September 20th 17, 08:18 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Einstein's Most Obvious Nonsense

Wikipedia: "Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [....] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

Since c'=c ± v (the speed of light varies with the speed of the emitter) was "explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887", then perhaps the antithesis, c' = c (the speed of light is independent of the speed of the emitter), was contradicting those results?

This is a question without an answer in Einstein's schizophrenic world. Too dangerous to even think of it:

"Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are inimical to Ingsoc, and of being bored or repelled by any train of thought which is capable of leading in a heretical direction. Crimestop, in short, means protective stupidity." http://ebooks..adelaide.edu.au/o/orw...hapter2.9.html

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
Length Contraction: the Most Obvious Idiocy in Einstein's Relativity Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 August 15th 17 08:21 AM
Obvious Absurdity of Einstein's Time Dilation Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 August 6th 16 09:38 PM
Einstein's Method: Explaining Nonsense in Terms of More Nonsense Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 April 30th 16 01:15 PM
The Obvious Falsehood of Einstein's Relativity Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 March 7th 16 12:48 PM
THE OBVIOUS ABSURDITY OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 6 December 4th 13 12:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:47 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.