EINSTEINIANA: THE SIRIUS B FRAUD

http://www.answers.com/topic/arthur-...cat=technology
"Further support came in 1924 when Einstein's prediction of the
reddening of starlight by the gravitational field of the star was
tested: at Eddington's request Walter Adams detected and measured the
shift in wavelength of the spectral lines of Sirius B, the dense white-
dwarf companion of the star Sirius. Eddington thus did much to
establish Einstein's theory..."

In fact, Eddington fooled Walter Adams into measuring the wrong
gravitational redshift. Details he

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/inde...-la-relativite

Pentcho Valev

http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Arthur Eddington , le premier en 1924, calculâtes théoriquement un
décalage 0,007% attendu la surface de Sirius mais avec des données
fausses à l'époque sur la masse et le rayon de l'étoile. L'année
suivante, Walter Adams mesurerait exactement ces 0.007%. Il s'avère
aujourd'hui que ces mesures , qui constituèrent pendant quarante ans
une "preuves" de la relativité, étaient largement "arrangée" tant
était grand le désir de vérifier la théorie d'Enstein. La véritable
valeur fut mesurée en 1965. Elle est de 0.03% car Sirius est plus
petite , et sont champ de gravitation est plus fort que ne le pensait
Eddington."

Pentcho Valev

On Jul 13, 6:59*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Arthur Eddington , le premier en 1924, calculâtes théoriquement un
décalage 0,007% attendu la surface de Sirius mais avec des données
fausses à l'époque sur la masse et le rayon de l'étoile. L'année
suivante, Walter Adams mesurerait exactement ces 0.007%. Il s'avère
aujourd'hui que ces mesures , qui constituèrent pendant quarante ans
une "preuves" de la relativité, étaient largement "arrangée" tant
était grand le désir de vérifier la théorie d'Enstein. La véritable
valeur fut mesurée en 1965. Elle est de 0.03% car Sirius est plus
petite , et sont champ de gravitation est plus fort que ne le pensait
Eddington."

In the Sirius B case Arthur Eddington and Walter Adams are the obvious
liars but in the Mercury's orbit case the liar seems to be Divine
Albert himself:

http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Le deuxième test classique donne en revanche des inquiétudes.
Historiquement, pourtant, l'explication de l'avance du périhélie de
Mercure, proposé par Einstein lui-même, donna ses lettres de noblesse
à la relativité générale. Il s'agissait de comprendra pourquoi le
périhélie de Mercure ( le point de son orbite le plus proche du
soleil ) se déplaçait de 574 s d'arc par siècle. Certes, sur ces 574
s, 531 s'expliquaient par les perturbations gravitationnels dues aux
autres planètes. Mais restait 43 s, le fameux effet "périhélique "
inexpliqué par les lois de Newton. Le calcul relativiste d'Einstein
donna 42,98 s ! L'accord et si parfait qu'il ne laisse la place à
aucune discussion. Or depuis 1966, le soleil est soupçonné ne pas être
rigoureusement sphérique mais légèrement aplati à l'équateur. Une très
légère dissymétries qui suffirait à faire avancer le périhélie de
quelques secondes d'arc. Du coup, la preuve se transformerait en
réfutation puisque les 42,88 s du calcul d'Einstein ne pourrait pas
expliquer le mouvement réel de Mercure."

More explanation he

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/inde...-la-relativite

Pentcho Valev

On Jul 13, 4:11*pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://www.answers.com/topic/arthur-...cat=technology
"Further support came in 1924 when Einstein's prediction of the
reddening of starlight by the gravitational field of the star was
tested: at Eddington's request Walter Adams detected and measured the
shift in wavelength of the spectral lines of Sirius B, the dense white-
dwarf companion of the star Sirius. Eddington thus did much to
establish Einstein's theory..."

In fact, Eddington fooled Walter Adams into measuring the wrong
gravitational redshift. Details he

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/inde...0-histoire-des...

Pentcho Valev


Much thanks for exposing this, Pancho. We'll put it in with the great
Marie Celeste fraud.

On 13 Jul, 17:59, Pentcho Valev wrote:
http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Arthur Eddington , le premier en 1924, calculâtes théoriquement un
décalage 0,007% attendu la surface de Sirius mais avec des données
fausses à l'époque sur la masse et le rayon de l'étoile. L'année
suivante, Walter Adams mesurerait exactement ces 0.007%. Il s'avère
aujourd'hui que ces mesures , qui constituèrent pendant quarante ans
une "preuves" de la relativité, étaient largement "arrangée" tant
était grand le désir de vérifier la théorie d'Enstein. La véritable
valeur fut mesurée en 1965. Elle est de 0.03% car Sirius est plus
petite , et sont champ de gravitation est plus fort que ne le pensait
Eddington."

Pentcho Valev


You did not mention

L'existence du décalage gravitationnels ne fut réellement démontrer qu'un 1960 par une expérience de laboratoire, puis, un peu plus tard en juin 1976, lors du vol d'une fusée Scout emportant une horloge atomique à hydrogène dans un vole balistique qui atteignit une hauteur de 10000m.. L'expérience, baptisée Gravity Probe A, compara avec une grande précision le signal émis par l'horloge dans le champ terrestre plus faible qui régnait à haute altitude avec celui émis par une horloge au sol. Les variations de la fréquence de l'horloge furent celles prédîtes par la théorie d'Enstein à mieux que 1 % près. D'autres tentatives eurent lieu par la suite , mais leur précision demeura moindre.

Also look at GPS. The CIA could not have had their war in Iraq without
it.

La relativité n'est-elle qu'une étape dans une théorie plus vaste?

Well surpersymmetry states that every boson, including the photon and
graviton (the phtotino and gravitino). Relativity is 4 dimensional.
Supersymmetry ans string theory have more dimensions.

Apres la 2 guerre mondiale. L' EU dit que tous les ciminals de guerre
etaient cherchés. En fait ODESSA (Oganisation der Ehemaliger SS
Anhoeriger) avait un pipline pour transporter les ciminels de
l'Allegmagne A Amerique du Sud et le Moyen Orient. Quelques furent en
EU en Area 51 ou ils travailent sur antigravitie et surcoutes
volantes. Selon le Soliel Noir la relativite etaint fausse et
l'energie vient d'Aldebaron. En effect la seul "aldebaron" fut
"aldebaron khyyid" le bon suiveur.

Le CIA fut vendu quelquechose d'inutile. (En anglais en dit "sold a
pup (petit chien)". Or le CIA n'a jamis demandé quelqu'un qui
comprennaient quelquechose sur Relativité (soleil noir) ou arabique
(Iraq).

Je veut demander. En France est il un movement de sucoups volants
(petits hommes verts), ou trouve t'il suelment en monde anglophone.

J'espere que les gens en france comprenront que la Relativité est
etablie. Il n'est pas une preuve contradisante. J'espere aussi qui si
la réponse soit non a ma question que on comprendra que contr
relativité est une autre mensonge de CIA.


- Ian Parker

I hope you can all see that this is the CIA at work. Innuendo. No
mention of the latest experiments, no mention of GPS without which you
would have had to consult Arabic experts! What does this amount to.
Smear really. Of course there are botched experiments. There have
always been in every field.


- Ian Parker

Einsteiniana's most pernicious hoax is undoubtedly the muon hoax. It
is based on measuring the lifetime of muons "at rest". When cosmic-ray
muons bump into an obstacle so that their speed instantly changes from
about 300000km/s to zero, their forced and quick disintegration makes
Einsteinians sing "Divine Einstein" and go into convulsions. Why?
Simply because in Einstein zombie world human rationality is so
devastated that, while the muon undergoes such a terrible crash,
Einsteinians safely declare that in fact this muon is "at rest" and,
in perfect accordance with Divine Albert's Divine Theory, being "at
rest", disintegrates more quickly than another muon that is not "at
rest" (that is, the other muon is not involved in a crash):

http://websci.smith.edu/~pdecowsk/muons.html
"The purpose of this experiment is to measure life time of muons
decaying at rest. Muons, produced in the atmoshere bombarded by high
energy cosmic radiation, are passing through the system of two
detectors located one above the other one. A coincidence of signals
from these two detectors (signals occuring in both detectors within
100ns) marks a particle entering the muon telescope from above and
serves as a filter rejecting many noninteresting signals from
background radiation. Some particles, with appropriate energies, will
end their flight in the lower detector (proper amount of lead between
both detectors ensures that many of them will be muons). If a stopped
particle is muon, it will decay after some time producing electron.
The time interval between signals from the muon entering the lower
detector and the electron emerging after its decay is converted by a
time-to-amplitude converter into amplitude of signal fed to the CAMAC
analog-to-digital converter (ADC) controlled by the computer. The
spectrum of time intervals is displayed in the figure below. The
expected distribution should be exponential with the exponential time
constant being the average life time of muon. The full range of the
spectrum (about channel 2000) corresponds to the time interval of
about 25 microsecond. There are not many muons with such energies that
they will end their path exactly in the lower detector (usually they
will pass both detectors and will be stopped in somewhere in the
ground), so counting rate is rather low. To collect a reasonable
number of events, the experiment has to be run a number of days."

Pentcho Valev

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 08:11:52 -0700 (PDT), Pentcho Valev
wrote:

http://www.answers.com/topic/arthur-...cat=technology
"Further support came in 1924 when Einstein's prediction of the
reddening of starlight by the gravitational field of the star was
tested: at Eddington's request Walter Adams detected and measured the
shift in wavelength of the spectral lines of Sirius B, the dense white-
dwarf companion of the star Sirius. Eddington thus did much to
establish Einstein's theory..."

In fact, Eddington fooled Walter Adams into measuring the wrong
gravitational redshift. Details he

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/inde...-la-relativite

Pentcho Valev



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

Einstein's "Relativity" book, Appendix 3 "The experimental
confirmation of the general theory of relativity"::
http://www.relativitybook.com/resour...ivity_pdf.html

:: " It is an open question whether or not this effect exists, and
:: at the present time (1920) astronomers are working with great
:: zeal towards the solution. Owing to the smallness of the effect
:: in the case of the sun, it is difficult to form an opinion as
:: to its existence. Whereas Grebe and Bachem (Bonn), as a result
:: of their own measurements and those of Evershed and Schwarzschild
:: on the cyanogen bands, have placed the existence of the effect
:: almost beyond doubt, other investigators, particularly St. John,
:: have been led to the opposite opinion in consequence of their
:: measurements. "

Footnote by R.W. Lawson (translator) to Appendix 3::

:: " Note - The displacement of spectral lines towards the red end
:: of the spectrum was definitely established by Adams in 1924,
:: by observations on the dense companion of Sirius, for which
:: the effect is about thirty times greater than for the sun.
:: R. W. L. "

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

Hetherington's critique of the Adams result::

:: 1980, N.S. Hetherington,
:: "Sirius B and the gravitational redshift - an historical review
:: Royal Astronomical Society, Quarterly Journal, vol. 21, Sept.1980, 246-252
:: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//...00246.000.html
::
:: " Somewhat ironically, as William McCrea has noted, the Royal
:: Astronomical Society seized upon Adams' measurement as reason
:: to award its Medal to Einstein ...
:: ...
:: Notwithstanding Moore's purported confirmation, Adams' alleged
:: measurement of the gravitaitonal redshift of Sirius B is no longer
:: accepted by astronomers.
:: ...
:: However unwilling astronomers are to admit it, here is yet another
:: instance of an astronomer eluding the constraints of objectivity
:: and finding not what is there but what he expected to find. "


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

Wesemael, arguing that Adam's result might (//might//) have been due
to unfortunate accident rather than fraud or expectation bias:

:: 1985, F. Wesemael,
:: "A comment on Adams' measurement of the gravitational redshift of Sirius B"
:: Royal Astronomical Society, Quarterly Journal (ISSN 0035-8738) [26]
:: Sept.1985, 273-278 (1985)
:: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985QJRAS..26..273W
::
:: The circumstantial evidence of too perfect an accord between the
:: Adams (1925) and Moore (1928) redshift measurements and Eddington's
:: (1924) predictions may well suggest the occurrence of some 'foul
:: play' in the scientific process. When such a deceit is suspected,
:: however, it behoves science historians to explore critically all
:: aspects of the problem before pronouncing a sentence as categorical,
:: and admittedly worrisome, as Hetherington's. While scientific work
:: is traditionally thought of as a purely objective enterprise, there
:: are indeed numerous cases where personal or cultural prejudice and
:: bias have been known to influence the outcome of scientific inquiry
:: (e.g. Gould 1982).
:: ...
:: Clearly, a reexamination of the original plate material and written
:: records will prove invaluable in assessing the validity of that
:: particular suggestion [[that Adam's result might instead be due to
:: accidental light contamination]]. In the meantime, however, it
:: appears that Hetherington's (1980) claim of deliberate deceit cannot
:: be substantiated.

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

For anyone interested in how our strong expectations of how
experiments "ought" to perform can sometimes cause science to go off
the rails, the paper by Jeng brings together some notable examples
(most of which have probably already been raised on s.p.r. by some of
us at some point).

: 2006, Monwhea Jeng,
: "A selected history of expectation bias in physics"
: Am. J. Phys. [74] 578-583 (2006)
: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508199
:
: " Abstract: The beliefs of physicists can bias their results towards
: their expectations in a number of ways. We survey a variety of
: historical cases of expectation bias in observations, experiments,
: and calculations. "
:
: The beliefs of physicists can bias their results towards their
: expectations in a number of ways. We survey a variety of historical
: cases of expectation bias in observations, experiments, and
: calculations.


Jeng doesn't discuss the Adams result, but mentions a few other
similarly-painful cases.

There's also some discussion of the problem in E. Baird (me),
"Relativity in Curved Spacetime" (2007), chapter 21, "The Perils of
Experimentation"

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

=Erk= (Eric Baird) www.relativitybook.com
: " To put it bluntly -- and to give away the punchline -- we have
: failed. We inherited a science, physics, that had been progressing
: so fast for so long that it was often taken as a model for how
: other kinds of science should be done. ... But today, despite our
: best efforts, what we know for certain about these laws is no more
: than we knew back in the 1970s. "
: -- Lee Smolin, "The Trouble with Physics" (2006)

On Jul 14, 12:39 am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
On Jul 13, 6:59 pm, Pentcho Valev wrote:

http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Arthur Eddington , le premier en 1924, calculâtes théoriquement un
décalage 0,007% attendu la surface de Sirius mais avec des données
fausses à l'époque sur la masse et le rayon de l'étoile. L'année
suivante, Walter Adams mesurerait exactement ces 0.007%. Il s'avère
aujourd'hui que ces mesures , qui constituèrent pendant quarante ans
une "preuves" de la relativité, étaient largement "arrangée" tant
était grand le désir de vérifier la théorie d'Enstein. La véritable
valeur fut mesurée en 1965. Elle est de 0.03% car Sirius est plus
petite , et sont champ de gravitation est plus fort que ne le pensait
Eddington."

In the Sirius B case Arthur Eddington and Walter Adams are the obvious
liars but in the Mercury's orbit case the liar seems to be Divine
Albert himself:

http://astronomy.ifrance.com/pages/g.../einstein.html
"Le deuxième test classique donne en revanche des inquiétudes.
Historiquement, pourtant, l'explication de l'avance du périhélie de
Mercure, proposé par Einstein lui-même, donna ses lettres de noblesse
à la relativité générale. Il s'agissait de comprendra pourquoi le
périhélie de Mercure ( le point de son orbite le plus proche du
soleil ) se déplaçait de 574 s d'arc par siècle. Certes, sur ces 574
s, 531 s'expliquaient par les perturbations gravitationnels dues aux
autres planètes. Mais restait 43 s, le fameux effet "périhélique "
inexpliqué par les lois de Newton. Le calcul relativiste d'Einstein
donna 42,98 s ! L'accord et si parfait qu'il ne laisse la place à
aucune discussion. Or depuis 1966, le soleil est soupçonné ne pas être
rigoureusement sphérique mais légèrement aplati à l'équateur. Une très
légère dissymétries qui suffirait à faire avancer le périhélie de
quelques secondes d'arc. Du coup, la preuve se transformerait en
réfutation puisque les 42,88 s du calcul d'Einstein ne pourrait pas
expliquer le mouvement réel de Mercure."

More explanation he

http://www.cieletespaceradio.fr/inde...-la-relativite

As Einsteinians themselves admit, the only verification of Divine
Albert's Divine Theory during his lifetime was the "explanation" of
Mercury's anomaly and therefore one can conclude that there was no
verification at all - the divinity was somehow self-evident:

http://discovermagazine.com/2004/sep/testing-the-limits
"Einstein didn’t care much about experiments. Of the three tests he
proposed for general relativity, the first—that clocks should tick
slower in a gravitational field—wasn’t satisfied until after his
death. Early experiments tended to contradict the prediction. His
second prediction, that light from distant stars would be deflected by
the warped space-time around the sun, catapulted him to world fame in
1919, when observations of a solar eclipse seemed to confirm his
prediction. But as historians have since shown, the 1919 measurements
were equivocal at best. The one unequivocal verification of Einstein’s
theory during his lifetime was his explanation of a tiny anomaly in
the orbit of Mercury. When he finally got that calculation to work,
that was the only evidence he needed that space and time really were
warped. “Nature had spoken to him,” wrote biographer Abraham Pais. “He
had to be right."

Pentcho Valev