A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

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

THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 27th 07, 08:35 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique
Pentcho Valev
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,078
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

FRAUD 1: The conclusion that reversible machines working between the
same two temperatures have the same efficiency IS A CONSEQUENCE of the
empirical fact that heat always flows spontaneously from hot to cold:

http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
"Ueber die bewegende Kraft der Warme" 1850 Clausius: "If we now
suppose that there are two substances of which the one can produce
more work than the other by the transfer of a given amount of heat,
or, what comes to the same thing, needs to transfer less heat from A
to B to produce a given quantity of work, we may use these two
substances alternately by producing work with one of them in the above
process. At the end of the operations both bodies are in their
original condition; further, the work produced will have exactly
counterbalanced the work done, and therefore, by our former principle,
the quantity of heat can have neither increased nor diminished. The
only change will occur in the distribution of the heat, since more
heat will be transferred from B to A than from A to B, and so on the
whole heat will be transferred from B to A. By repeating these two
processes alternately it would be possible, without any expenditure of
force or any other change, to transfer as much heat as we please from
a cold to a hot body, and this is not in accord with the other
relations of heat, since it always shows a tendency to equalize
temperature differences and therefore to pass from hotter to colder
bodies."

FRAUD 2: ANY irreversible process can be closed by a reversible
process to become a cycle:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/
"A more important objection, it seems to me, is that Clausius bases
his conclusion that the entropy increases in a nicht umkehrbar process
on the assumption that such a process can be closed by an umkehrbar
process to become a cycle. This is essential for the definition of the
entropy difference between the initial and final states. But the
assumption is far from obvious for a system more complex than an ideal
gas, or for states far from equilibrium, or for processes other than
the simple exchange of heat and work."

FRAUD 3:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
"...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
body.....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. It is at once apparent that this result still
holds good if the clock moves from A to B in any polygonal line, and
also when the points A and B coincide. If we assume that the result
proved for a polygonal line is also valid for a continuously curved
line, we arrive at this result: If one of two synchronous clocks at A
is moved in a closed curve with constant velocity until it returns to
A, the journey lasting t seconds, then by the clock which has remained
at rest the travelled clock on its arrival at A will be tv^2/2c^2
second slow. Thence we conclude that a balance-clock at the equator
must go more slowly, by a very small amount, than a precisely similar
clock situated at one of the poles under otherwise identical
conditions."

Pentcho Valev

Ads
  #2  
Old August 27th 07, 09:20 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique
Asp Explorer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

Et si tu fermais ta gueule ?

--
C'est Ă* l'heure du repas
qu'on voit les boules du chat
  #3  
Old August 27th 07, 10:00 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique
Androcles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,040
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS


"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
s.com...

:
: FRAUD 3:
:
: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
: "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
: c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
: body...

Third postulate:-
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,
who in 1895 failed an examination that would have allowed
him to study for a diploma as an electrical engineer at
the Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule in Zurich
(couldn't even pass the SATs).

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rt/tAB=tBA.gif

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without
evidence." -- Uncle Stooopid.
"Counterfactual assumptions yield nonsense.
If such a thing were actually observed, reliably and reproducibly, then
relativity would immediately need a major overhaul if not a complete
replacement." -- Humpty Roberts.


  #4  
Old August 27th 07, 10:57 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique
Jeckyl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

"Androcles" wrote in message
. ..

"Pentcho Valev" wrote in message
s.com...

:
: FRAUD 3:
:
: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
: "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
: c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
: body...

Third postulate:-
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,


Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and over
without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the time for
light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to travel the
same distance from B to A

The only one showing themselves to be STOOOPID here is you .. at best
obsessed.


  #5  
Old August 27th 07, 12:23 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.astrophysique
q-bit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

"Jeckyl" wrote
"Androcles" wrote
"Pentcho Valev" wrote
:
: FRAUD 3:

: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
: "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
: c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
: body...

Third postulate:-
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,


Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and over
without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the time for
light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to travel the
same distance from B to A


But he is right. Time and speed in a gravitation field depend on the
intensity of the field (g value) and depend on the direction of the movement.
See Inverse Square Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_Square_Law
Therefore the velocity and consequently the travel time is determined
by the direction of the movement within the gravity field.
Even light has to obey this law, cf. the above weblink.

Even Einstein has admitted this in his book. Einstein even goes further and
says "... the law of constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo [...] cannot claim
any unlimited validity." (Einstein's book "Relativity", Ch.22, p.85).
Ie. Einstein says that light speed is not constant even in vacuum space!
This is obviously correct, also due to his own equivalence principle!
Ie. accelleration/deceleration in free space can be considered like being in a gravity field.
So here are even double arguments which back the fact that the speed
of light is not constant when:
1) in gravity field, or
2) accellerating/decelerating
What remains is that the constancy of the speed of light is valid only
in situations where SR applies, ie. practically only in free space AND
either at rest or at a constant v.
And as everybody knows (should know) for real world applications SR is useless...

  #6  
Old August 27th 07, 01:29 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Jeckyl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

"q-bit" wrote in message
...
"Jeckyl" wrote
"Androcles" wrote
"Pentcho Valev" wrote
:
: FRAUD 3:

: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
: "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity
: c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
: body...

Third postulate:-
'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,


Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and over
without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the time
for
light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to travel the
same distance from B to A


But he is right. Time and speed in a gravitation field depend on the
intensity of the field (g value) and depend on the direction of the
movement.


Andro didn't say that. And Einstein was talking about in an inertial frame
(not withing a gravitational field)

See Inverse Square Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_Square_Law
Therefore the velocity and consequently the travel time is determined
by the direction of the movement within the gravity field.
Even light has to obey this law, cf. the above weblink.

Even Einstein has admitted this in his book. Einstein even goes further
and
says "... the law of constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo [...]
cannot claim
any unlimited validity." (Einstein's book "Relativity", Ch.22, p.85).


Of course not .. SR is the special case .. when gravitational potentials
aren't taken into account. That's all its supposed to be. GR is the
general case

Ie. Einstein says that light speed is not constant even in vacuum space!
This is obviously correct, also due to his own equivalence principle!
Ie. accelleration/deceleration in free space can be considered like being
in a gravity field.
So here are even double arguments which back the fact that the speed
of light is not constant when:
1) in gravity field, or
2) accellerating/decelerating
What remains is that the constancy of the speed of light is valid only
in situations where SR applies,


If you're not talking locally

ie. practically only in free space AND
either at rest or at a constant v.


SR can be used in accelerating frames of reference.

And as everybody knows (should know) for real world applications SR is
useless...


Its a very good approximation for many many cases. Just like classical
cases are good approximations at relatively low velocities.

Really . you've said nothing to support andro's obsession with and ridicule
of the quote from Einstein.


  #7  
Old August 27th 07, 01:30 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Androcles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,040
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS


"q-bit" wrote in message
...
: "Jeckyl" wrote
: "Androcles" wrote
: "Pentcho Valev" wrote
: :
: : FRAUD 3:
:
: : http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: : ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30,
1905:
: : "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity
: : c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
: : body...
:
: Third postulate:-
: 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
: light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
: to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
: agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
: dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,
:
: Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and over
: without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the time
for
: light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to travel
the
: same distance from B to A
:
It's like those commercials you see on TV. You have to keep
repeating them or the public won't know that the soap powder
washes whiter. Whiter than what, we aren't told. I can't give it a
rest until the knuckle-dragging nym-shifting neanderthal trolls
like Fecal Jeckyl understand it is bull**** that Einstein was peddling.



: But he is right. Time and speed in a gravitation field depend on the
: intensity of the field (g value) and depend on the direction of the
movement.

Nonsense, time is indepent of gravity and independent of velocity.

"Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature
flows equably without regard to anything external, and by another name is
called duration"
-- Sir Isaac Newton (Principia - definition I.)


The only way to try to show otherwise is to make a ridiculous and
unproven statement such as Einstein did. Fecal Jeckyl is taken in by
a huckster, Fecal Jeckyl cannot think. He's one of the sheep, all bleating
the same "baaa", eating the same grass, treading in the same ****;
one says it, they all say it.

See for yourself, Einstein's third postulate means 4 = 12.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rt/tAB=tBA.gif

Being a charlatan, Einstein calls it a definition instead of a postulate
that he created. All con-artists have to play Mr. Nice Guy to be
successful but they are still all criminals.

Of course Fecal Jeckyl wants me to give it a rest. He has no reply for it.





  #8  
Old August 27th 07, 01:39 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Jeckyl
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 207
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

"Androcles" wrote in message
o.uk...
It's like those commercials you see on TV. You have to keep
repeating them or the public won't know that the soap powder
washes whiter. Whiter than what, we aren't told. I can't give it a
rest until the knuckle-dragging nym-shifting neanderthal trolls
like Fecal Jeckyl understand it is bull**** that Einstein was peddling.


You don't show that there is anything wrong. .you just repeat the same
matnra over and over. Sad

Of course Fecal Jeckyl wants me to give it a rest. He has no reply for it.


There is nothing to reply to .. you just quote the same thing over and over
as if you doing so had some meaning.. It doesn't .. It just makes you look
like a fool.


  #9  
Old August 27th 07, 03:12 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
q-bit
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS

"Androcles" wrote
"q-bit" wrote
: "Jeckyl" wrote
: "Androcles" wrote
: "Pentcho Valev" wrote
: :
: : FRAUD 3:
:
: : http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: : ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30, 1905:
: : "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity
: : c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body...
:
: Third postulate:-
: 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
: light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
: to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
: agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
: dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,
:
: Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and over
: without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the time for
: light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to travel the
: same distance from B to A
:
It's like those commercials you see on TV. You have to keep
repeating them or the public won't know that the soap powder
washes whiter. Whiter than what, we aren't told. I can't give it a
rest until the knuckle-dragging nym-shifting neanderthal trolls
like Fecal Jeckyl understand it is bull**** that Einstein was peddling.

: Time and speed in a gravitation field depend on the intensity
: of the field (g value) and depend on the direction of the movement.

Nonsense, time is indepent of gravity and independent of velocity.

"Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature
flows equably without regard to anything external, and by another name is
called duration"
-- Sir Isaac Newton (Principia - definition I.)


Newton means the universal (absolute) time of the universe, not local time.
But in a gravitation field towards the center of the G-field things of course
accellerate (due to the attraction of the G-field), ie. get faster, and this causes
its clock to go slower than in free space. For example photons reach their
destination faster, ie. v_photon becomes greater than c.

In the opposite direction (off the center of the G-field) things of course
reverse: speed gets slower (again due to the attraction of the G-field,
but oppsite direction) and time goes faster as the intensity of
the G-field weakens the further the distance becomes.

And if you then finally are in free space (g~0) then time again switches
to go slower IF your v is 0.
So, we get this famous time cone -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
(it is unfortunately wrongly called "light cone" in the literature).

As I once said, you should play with this important formula of Newton
g = G*M/(R + h)^2
h=0 is Earth surface. Set h to big values and see
how g becomes smaller and smaller.
In free space it is ~ 0, and only here is the Absolute Time Newton meant.
We on Earth have only a Local Time, it runs slower than the Absolute Time
of the free space.

Just some easy to remember hints:
The basis of time is free space (g ~ 0).
If a thing goes fast then time goes slower for it.
Time on Earth goes about 9.8 times slower than in free space
because of the gravity field of the Earth (g ~ 9.8)

I've said what my own truly independent research shows me,
it's of course up to you what you believe and/or what your
own research shows you.

See for yourself, Einstein's third postulate means 4 = 12.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...rt/tAB=tBA.gif

Being a charlatan, Einstein calls it a definition instead of a postulate
that he created. All con-artists have to play Mr. Nice Guy to be
successful but they are still all criminals.


Einstein has made errors, and has corrected some of his errors.
The problem is the SR/GR charlatans of nowadays who don't want
hear that their god Einstein committed errors.
But as we all know it's all just business: if people hear that Einstein
made some errors then the marketing clan of Einstein of course
cannot sell their books; ie. it's all nothing but marketing politics...
It has nothing to do with science, and it harms the scientific world
what such charlatans do.
Here's a good study of tricks Einstein has used and also his errors,
all explained and proved mathematically; there is also a film for download:
http://www.relativitychallenge.com/mistakes.htm
http://www.relativitychallenge.com/faq.htm

  #10  
Old August 27th 07, 03:42 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro
Androcles[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,040
Default THREE FRAUDS THAT KILLED PHYSICS


"q-bit" wrote in message
...
: "Androcles" wrote
: "q-bit" wrote
: : "Jeckyl" wrote
: : "Androcles" wrote
: : "Pentcho Valev" wrote
: : :
: : : FRAUD 3:
: :
: : : http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
: : : ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. Einstein June 30,
1905:
: : : "...light is always propagated in empty space with a definite
velocity
: : : c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting
body...
: :
: : Third postulate:-
: : 'we establish by definition that the "time" required by
: : light to travel from A to B equals the "time" it requires
: : to travel from B to A' because I SAY SO and you have to
: : agree because I'm the great genius, STOOOPID, don't you
: : dare question it. -- Albert Einstein,
: :
: : Give it a rest andro .. you keep saying that same things over and
over
: : without a single reason for why that would be a problem .. why the
time for
: : light to travel from A to B should be different to the time to
travel the
: : same distance from B to A
: :
: It's like those commercials you see on TV. You have to keep
: repeating them or the public won't know that the soap powder
: washes whiter. Whiter than what, we aren't told. I can't give it a
: rest until the knuckle-dragging nym-shifting neanderthal trolls
: like Fecal Jeckyl understand it is bull**** that Einstein was peddling.
:
: : Time and speed in a gravitation field depend on the intensity
: : of the field (g value) and depend on the direction of the movement.
:
: Nonsense, time is indepent of gravity and independent of velocity.
:
: "Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own
nature
: flows equably without regard to anything external, and by another name
is
: called duration"
: -- Sir Isaac Newton (Principia - definition I.)
:
: Newton means the universal (absolute) time of the universe, not local
time.

If it's universal then it's local too, by definition.

"Absolute, true, and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature
flows equably WITHOUT REGARD to ANYTHING external, and by
another name is called DURATION"
: -- Sir Isaac Newton (Principia - definition I.)



: But in a gravitation field towards the center of the G-field things of
course
: accellerate (due to the attraction of the G-field), ie. get faster, and
this causes
: its clock to go slower than in free space. For example photons reach their
: destination faster, ie. v_photon becomes greater than c.


That doesn't change time, and you keep on muttering the same old
garbage about c. ALL VELOCITIES ARE RELATIVE!
What does it take for you to understand what RELATIVE means?

Look, if you approach a sound source at v then the sound
approaches you at c+v, where c is the velocity sound in air.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PoR/PoR.htm

: In the opposite direction (off the center of the G-field) things of course
: reverse: speed gets slower (again due to the attraction of the G-field,
: but oppsite direction) and time goes faster as the intensity of
: the G-field weakens the further the distance becomes.

TIME DOESN'T "GO FASTER". Faster than what?
Soap powder doesn't "wash whiter". Whiter than what?
What you measuring it to? The universal clock? It's
hiding at the other focus of the Earth's ellipse around sun.


:
: And if you then finally are in free space (g~0) then time again switches
: to go slower IF your v is 0.

Slower than what?


: So, we get this famous time cone --
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
: (it is unfortunately wrongly called "light cone" in the literature).

Wackypedia is as bent as the people that write it.



: As I once said, you should play with this important formula of Newton
: g = G*M/(R + h)^2
: h=0 is Earth surface. Set h to big values and see
: how g becomes smaller and smaller.

No I shouldn't, you should stop believing in fairy tales and Einstein's
fraud.



: In free space it is ~ 0, and only here is the Absolute Time Newton meant.
: We on Earth have only a Local Time, it runs slower than the Absolute Time
: of the free space.


Nonsense. Check out a sundial.
[rest of garbage snipped]


 




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
some sorry lexical trainer merges frauds in addition to Rashid's amazing submission Admiral Rudy U. Licausi Amateur Astronomy 0 August 12th 07 07:07 AM
alt.astronomy, alt.sci.physics, alt.sci.physics.new-theories, AJAY SHARMA Misc 0 November 5th 06 03:20 AM
ATTN: Kooks, Frauds and Saucerheads - You can be SAVED from Gubbermint Intrusion! Twittering One Misc 0 June 30th 05 05:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2022 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.