IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/perimeter.html
"In early October, scientific and political bigwigs from around the
world gathered in Waterloo, Ontario, to celebrate the opening of the
new headquarters of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical
Physics.....But the building's plush appurtenances just set the scene.
Perimeter stands out because of a $66 million endowment from Mike
Lazaridis, founder and co-CEO of Research in Motion; $13 million more
from two of his colleagues; and $43 million from the local,
provincial, and federal governments. That kind of cash can set a group
of physicists free from the distractions that get in the way of
scientific progress, like teaching and grading papers. Add to that a
management philosophy that rejects the bureaucracy of a big
university, and you're sending ripples through the fabric of research
space-time.....Of course, like all efforts to advance physics,
Perimeter runs the risk of abject failure. It is 100 years since
Einstein published his papers on relativity, and we're still grappling
with problems that stumped him."

Why ABJECT FAILURE? Do hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult know about
this ABJECT FAILURE? Where will the ABJECT FAILURE come from?

Newton's particle model of light obviously deals with DISCONTINUOUS
STRUCTURES. On the other hand, Einstein's light postulate

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ "...light is
always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is
independent of the state of motion of the emitting body."

is incompatible with Newton's particle model and can only be dealt
with in terms of the wave model of light presenting light as a
CONTINUOUS FIELD. And hypnotists in Einstein criminal
cult have discovered an extremely dangerous villain called "The Other
Einstein" and this extremely dangerous villain called "The Other
Einstein" will unavoidably destroy contemporary physics:

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf...09145525ca.pdf
Albert Einstein (more precisely, the extremely dangerous villain
called "The Other Einstein"): "I consider it entirely possible that
physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous
structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air,
including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of
contemporary physics."

What can be done? Something CAN be done. Something SHOULD be done. In
any event, sailboats should be saved:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/perimeter.html
"Piloting his Taser sailboat off the shore of Lake Ontario on a
beautiful fall day, Lee Smolin looks like a screenwriter's vision of a
scientist - wire-rimmed glasses, a scraggly beard, and windblown hair
- squeezed into a head-to-toe black wet suit. (Subsequent meetings
will confirm that he always looks like that, minus the wet suit.) He's
the archetypal Perimeter researcher, full of respect for the world's
great theoretical physics locales - the Institute for Advanced Study
in Princeton, the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics at UC Santa
Barbara, Harvard and MIT in Cambridge, and CERN in Geneva. He is also
quite happy to point out how Perimeter is, well, better."

Piloting sailboats is a tradition in Einstein criminal cult. The
mystery surrounding the name of Einstein's sailboat is one of the most
exciting unresolved problems in today's science:

http://www.forward.com/articles/11338/

Pentcho Valev

IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF EINSTEIN CRIMINAL CULT ....

Doctor Evil is simpering his finger at his lips ....

Teaching in the headquarters of Einstein criminal cult:

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/en/...ty_Slow_Time?/
"One may imagine the photon losing energy as it climbs against the
Earth's gravitational field much like a rock thrown upward loses
kinetic energy as it slows down, the main difference being that the
photon does not slow down; it always moves at the speed of light."

http://admin.wadsworth.com/resource_...Ch01-Essay.pdf
Clifford Will, "THE RENAISSANCE OF GENERAL RELATIVITY": "The first
glimmerings of the black hole idea date to the 18th century, in the
writings of a British amateur astronomer, the Reverend John Michell.
Reasoning on the basis of the corpuscular theory that light would be
attracted by gravity, he noted that the speed of light emitted from
the surface of a massive body would be reduced by the time the light
was very far from the source. (Michell of course did not know special
relativity.)"

Who was right: the 18th century amateur John Michell who did not know
special relativity or the 21st century criminal who knows special
relativity (more precisely, knows what a wonderful money-spinner
special relativity is) and teaches at the Perimeter Institute?

Pentcho Valev

Teaching in the headquarters of Einstein criminal cult:

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/en/...r_Universe/Why...
"One may imagine the photon losing energy as it climbs against the
Earth's gravitational field much like a rock thrown upward loses
kinetic energy as it slows down, the main difference being that the
photon does not slow down; it always moves at the speed of light."

http://admin.wadsworth.com/resource_...urces/05344933...
Clifford Will, "THE RENAISSANCE OF GENERAL RELATIVITY": "The first
glimmerings of the black hole idea date to the 18th century, in the
writings of a British amateur astronomer, the Reverend John Michell.
Reasoning on the basis of the corpuscular theory that light would be
attracted by gravity, he noted that the speed of light emitted from
the surface of a massive body would be reduced by the time the light
was very far from the source. (Michell of course did not know special
relativity.)"

Who was right: the 18th century amateur John Michell who did not know
special relativity or the 21st century criminal who knows special
relativity (more precisely, knows what a wonderful money-spinner
special relativity is) and teaches at the Perimeter Institute?

So the Perimeter Institute teaches that the speed of light is constant
even in the presence of a gravitational field, but the Perimeter
Institute is also ready to refute special relativity since in the
Perimeter Institute physicists HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PROBE MORE
FOUNDATIONAL PHYSICAL QUESTIONS:

http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ1...7Cesq%7Cemb%7C
"Perimeter was founded by Mike Lazaridis, founder and co-CEO of
Research in Motion, maker of the BlackBerry. As the story goes,
Lazaridis, who went to college in Waterloo, thought the scientific
world was much too focused on areas of research that promised
immediate results and fast returns on investment. Nobody was willing
to fund basic research into arcane fields, like the foundations of
quantum mechanics. So in 2000 he cut a check for $66 million and
convinced two partners and the Canadian government to chip in tens of
millions more. His plan was to build a physics institute that was
different, a place where physicists would HAVE THE FREEDOM TO PROBE
MORE FOUNDATIONAL PHYSICAL QUESTIONS....On the third floor of
Perimeter, at the far end of the hall, is a small office with a small
sofa wedged next to an overflowing bookshelf. And on that couch,
dressed more like a New York artist than a theoretical physicist--
black, black, and more black--is Lee Smolin....If the tension between
string and antistring theorist was once a family argument, Smolin, the
author recently of The Trouble with Physics, is the person who decided
to air the dirty laundry. "This is an experiment," says Smolin of PI.
"Like any experiment, it's a risk and it could fail. The most
important question is, Will important science get done here? And I
think there are already examples of things that happened here that
would not have happened elsewhere, because the people would not have
been in touch with each other." Things like safer cryptography, recent
advances in loop quantum gravity, and a POSSIBLE REFUTATION OF SPECIAL
RELATIVITY, the law that nothing can move faster than the speed of
light."

Another reason why the Perimeter Institute wants to refute special
relativity is that Einstein secretly refuted it in 1907 when he
realized that the speed of light is variable in the presence of a
gravitational field:

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm Lee Smolin: "Quantum
theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few people have
appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories of
relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that the
laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that the
speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how the
source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that theory
are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
within two years of publishing it."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers...UP_TimesNR.pdf "What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Pentcho Valev

In a gravitational field there is still one straight line. The verticle
line of acceleration | deceleration. As long as there is even one straight
line, even if one has to go verticle to realize it, the constancy of the
speed of light proves.

Which universe is it that unfolds flat without any fold curvature to it?
Zeroes, strictly speaking, as to fold or curvature? I would suppose the
"simultaneous" universe to be that universe flatly constantly opposed to
fold and curve.

You are still incapacitated in that you can't seem to gain periphery or
do, or see, time over time...or rather 'space-time' over 'space-time'.
There's more than one way to skin a cat (herein, more than one way to
describe a straight line).

------------------

"If you fight dragons long enough, you become a dragon: if you stare into
the Abyss, the Abyss will stare back into you."

This mule's been there, done that. So?

-----------------

GLB

On Aug 21, 9:49 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Teaching in the headquarters of Einstein criminal cult:


I am enfamed! Pentcho Valev has replied to one of my postings!