DIGNITARIES AND THE DEATH OF THEORETICAL SCIENCE

Pentcho Valev wrote:
It seems dignitaries now believe that the century old money-spinner
called "I WORSHIP EINSTEIN" should be abandoned:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_ne...057529,00.html "Few
scientists need the final results, which will be revealed in December,
to convince them of Einstein's genius. 'From the most esoteric aspects
of time dilation through to the beautiful and simple equation, e=mc2,
the vast bulk of Einstein's ideas about the universe are standing up
to the test of time,' said Robert Massey, from the Royal Astronomical
Society. He said the mission was 'legitimate science' to test a theory
and confirm its brilliance, but others have criticised the costs and
length of the study, claiming that what was announced had already been
shown. Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, said the announcement
would 'fork no lightning'."

Dignitaries even have some ideas about the new money-spinner whose
name will undoubtedly be "I IMPROVE ON EINSTEIN":

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts : "A GROUP of
astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws thought to
govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of relativity,
must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor Stephen Hawking
and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such laws may only work
for our universe but not in others that are now also thought to
exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT
THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME - 186,000 miles a second in
a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so concerned at the impact
of such ideas that they recently organised a private conference in
Cambridge for more than 30 leading cosmologists."

The only problem is the deductive nature of theoretical science. Just
change a single initial assumption and the whole theoretical castle
collapses. What makes things worse is that, at the end of his life,
the divine juggler suddenly became honest and made awful confessions:

Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the
speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and
theory of gravity is false."

Einstein again: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be
based on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that
case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation
theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."

Einsteinians seem to know now that, AS FAR AS THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS
CONCERNED, Newton's particle model of light, that is, the concept
according to which light moves in the form of DISCONTINUOUS
structures, is correct. Einsteinians are even ready to start
worshipping the emission theory (they know how to redirect their
worship within a few days):

http://www.chapitre.com/CHAPITRE/fr/...pel=CHAPIT RE
"Avant Einstein : Relativite, Lumiere, Gravitation"
Auteur : Eisenstaedt, Jean
"À l'université, on ânonne sans trop comprendre : « la vitesse de la
lumière est indépendante de celle de sa source ». Le principe de
relativité jeté aux orties, l'éther entre en scène, un mot savant dont
on n'a jamais vraiment su ce qu'il recouvre : un
désastre !.....Newtoniens impénitents, ces « philosophes de la nature
» ont tout simplement traité la lumière comme faite de vulgaires
particules matérielles : des « corpuscules lumineux ». Mais ce sont
gens sérieux et ils se sont basés sur leurs Classiques, Galilée,
Newton et ses Principia où déjà l'on trouve des idées intéressantes. À
la fin du XVIIIe siècle, au siècle des Lumières (si bien nommé en
l'occurrence !), en Angleterre, en Écosse, en Prusse et même à Paris,
une véritable balistique de la lumière sous-tend silencieusement la
théorie de l'émission, avatar de la théorie corpusculaire de la
lumière de Newton. Lus à la lumière ( !) des théories aujourd'hui
acceptées, les résultats ne sont pas minces : toute une préhistoire
émerge ainsi ! Une physique des rapports entre la lumière, la
relativité, la gravitation... De très nombreux tests, expériences et
effets aujourd'hui bien connus, peuvent s'y lire. Il s'agit de rien
moins que d'une cinématique classique (galiléo-newtonienne) de la
lumière, cohérente avec le principe de relativité et donc comparable
par anticipation avec la cinématique einsteinienne. Il y manque bien
sûr - et ce n'est pas rien ! - l'étrange loi de composition des
vitesses (qui ne s'ajoutent plus si simplement) de Lorentz et
l'interprétation plus tardive de Minkowski, qu'Einstein lui-même eut
bien du mal à accepter..... Les « relativités » d'Einstein,
cinématique einsteinienne et théorie de la gravitation, ont la triste
réputation d'être difficiles... Ne remettent-elles pas en cause des
notions familières ? Leur « refonte » est d'autant plus nécessaire."

The problem is, let me say it again, the awful confession of the
divine juggler that he found it suitable to make at the end of his
life:

Einstein: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based
on the field concept, i.e., on continuous structures. In that case,
nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory
included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."

Pentcho Valev