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

A New Einstein Would Have Nothing to Do - Could Not Kill Physics Again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 8th 20, 08:47 AM posted to sci.astro
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default A New Einstein Would Have Nothing to Do - Could Not Kill Physics Again

"How physics got 'stuck' — and why we desperately need a new Einstein" https://alternet.org/2020/09/how-phy...-new-einstein/

A new Einstein would have nothing to do - could not kill physics again. It got 'stuck' (died) thanks to the metastases of the nonsensical constant-speed-of-light postulate introduced in 1905 by the original Einstein:

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

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of containing new quantum gravitational effects." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250 http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257

"Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..." https://www.amazon.com/Time-Reborn-C.../dp/B00AEGQPFE

What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... [...] The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..." https://www.edge.org/response-detail/25477

See more he https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

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
Einstein's Physics: Constant Speed of Light. Einstein-Free Physics:Constant Wavelength of Light Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 August 10th 20 07:55 PM
Einstein's Physics Is Absurd. Towards Einstein-Free Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 July 24th 20 08:28 PM
The Difference Between Einstein's Physics and Einstein-Free Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 July 18th 20 12:55 AM
Einstein's Physics and Einstein-Free Physics Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 1 June 15th 20 06:08 PM
Is It Easy to Kill Physics? Pentcho Valev Astronomy Misc 2 May 27th 16 01:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:37 PM.


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.