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

Why Did the World Accept Einstein's Idiocies?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 21st 19, 05:24 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Why Did the World Accept Einstein's Idiocies?

In 1918 Einstein informed the gullible world that, as the traveling clock (twin) turns around and experiences acceleration, a HOMOGENEOUS gravitational field emerges. As a result, the distant stay-at-home clock somehow runs very fast (the stay-at-home twin suddenly gets very old) during the turning-around period:

Albert Einstein 1918: "A homogeneous gravitational field appears, that is directed towards the positive x-axis. Clock U1 is accelerated in the direction of the positive x-axis until it has reached the velocity v, then the gravitational field disappears again. An external force, acting upon U2 in the negative direction of the x-axis prevents U2 from being set in motion by the gravitational field. [...] According to the general theory of relativity, a clock will go faster the higher the gravitational potential of the location where it is located, and during partial process 3 U2 happens to be located at a higher gravitational potential than U1. The calculation shows that this speeding ahead constitutes exactly twice as much as the lagging behind during the partial processes 2 and 4." http://sciliterature.50webs.com/Dialog.htm

David Morin calls the idiocy "enough strangeness":

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, but enough strangeness occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older." http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf

In the quotation below Einstein's 1918 idiocy is clearly exposed, even though the emergence of the homogeneous gravitational field is not mentioned (it is too idiotic, even for the standards of Einstein's schizophrenic world):

"When the twin in the spaceship turns around to make his journey home, the shift in his frame of reference causes his perception of his brother's age to change rapidly: he sees his brother getting suddenly older. This means that when the twins are finally reunited, the stay-at-home twin is the older of the two." http://topquark.hubpages.com/hub/Twin-Paradox

Pentcho Valev
  #2  
Old March 22nd 19, 01:20 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Why Did the World Accept Einstein's Idiocies?

Special relativity predicts that time ticks FASTER for the moving observer. He will discover this by checking stationary clocks the spaceship passes by against the spaceship's clocks. The moving observer will find stationary clocks to be slow and clocks in his spaceship to be FAST:

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://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf

"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." http://topquark.hubpages.com/hub/Twin-Paradox

The above two texts, referring to what VALIDLY follows from Einstein's 1905 postulates, are exceptions. Validity is not cherished in Einstein's schizophrenic world.

In 1905 Einstein derived a conclusion implicitly suggesting that time ticks SLOWER for the moving observer:

Albert Einstein, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B." http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Einstein's 1905 conclusion was non sequitur; still "Time ticks SLOWER for the moving observer" is what Einsteinians almost universally teach nowadays:

Brian Greene: "If you're moving relative to somebody else, time for you slows down." https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QnmnLmwBmfE

Neil deGrasse Tyson: "We have ways of moving into the future. That is to have time tick more slowly for you than others, who you return to later on. We've known that since 1905, Einstein's special theory of relativity, which gives the precise prescription for how time would slow down for you if you are set into motion." http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ry?id=32191481

Jim Al-Khalili: "And, the faster you move and the longer you move at that speed, the slower your clock ticks, including your own internal biological clock, and so the slower you age - by tiny, tiny fractions of a second of course." http://www.jimal-khalili.com/blogs/2...m-with-the-app

Pentcho Valev
  #3  
Old March 22nd 19, 08:34 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Why Did the World Accept Einstein's Idiocies?

This is a breathtaking idiocy:

Albert Einstein, On the Principle of Relativity: "After all, when a beam of light travels with a stated velocity relative to one observer, then - so it seems - a second observer who is himself traveling in the direction of the propagation of the light beam should find the light beam propagating at a lesser velocity than the first observer does. If this were really true, then the law of light propagation in vacuum would not be the same for two observers who are in relative, uniform motion to each other - in contradiction to the principle of relativity stated above." https://einsteinpapers.press.princet.../vol6-trans/16

It is a total mystery why the scientific community has been worshiping Einstein's idiocies for more than a century. Something awful is happening to our civilization.

Pentcho Valev
  #4  
Old March 22nd 19, 12:28 PM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default Why Did the World Accept Einstein's Idiocies?

Einstein informs the gullible world that the inertial clock at the center of the rotating disk runs faster than the non-inertial clock on the edge of the disk, and this is a consequence of the Lorentz transformation:

Albert Einstein: "An observer who is sitting eccentrically on the disc K' is sensible of a force which acts outwards in a radial direction... [...] The observer performs experiments on his circular disc with clocks and measuring-rods. In doing so, it is his intention to arrive at exact definitions for the signification of time- and space-data with reference to the circular disc K', these definitions being based on his observations. What will be his experience in this enterprise? To start with, he places one of two identically constructed clocks at the centre of the circular disc, and the other on the edge of the disc, so that they are at rest relative to it. We now ask ourselves whether both clocks go at the same rate from the standpoint of the non-rotating Galileian reference-body K. As judged from this body, the clock at the centre of the disc has no velocity, whereas the clock at the edge of the disc is in motion relative to K in consequence of the rotation. According to a result obtained in Section XII, it follows that the latter clock goes at a rate permanently slower than that of the clock at the centre of the circular disc, i.e. as observed from K." http://www.bartleby.com/173/23.html

Einstein refers to Section XII

https://www.bartleby.com/173/12.html

but this Section does not contain any results explaining why the (inertial) clock at the center of the rotating disk should run FASTER than the (non-inertial) clock on the edge of the disk. Rather, the results in Section XII are all based on the Lorentz transformation which predicts SYMMETRICAL time dilation for two INERTIAL clocks: either inertial clock sees the other inertial clock running SLOW by a factor of 1/gamma = sqrt(1-(v/c)^2).

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dn97_m9XsAID8En.jpg

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
When Will Einstein's Idiocies End? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 October 28th 17 05:12 PM
Einstein's Idiocies in Songs Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 May 9th 17 07:42 PM
Idiocies Called Paradoxes in Einstein's Schizophrenic World Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 3 February 22nd 17 11:59 PM
WHO DEFENDS EINSTEIN IDIOCIES? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 35 October 5th 07 12:00 PM
EINSTEIN IDIOCIES FOREVER? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 15 July 5th 07 09:38 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:46 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.