1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ASTRO

  • Absolute Truth in Physics : Variable Speed of Light

    From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Sat Apr 1 17:52:52 2023
    There is absolute truth in science. Of the following two statements one is absolutely true, the other is false:

    (A) The speed of light, as measured by the observer (receiver), varies with the speed of the emitter.

    (B) The speed of light, as measured by the observer (receiver), does not vary with the speed of the emitter.

    Einstein hesitated between (A), a tenet of Newton's theory, and (B), a tenet of the ether theory, and finally chose (B) as his 1905 second postulate:

    Einstein: "I introduced the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which I borrowed from H. A. Lorentz's theory of the stationary luminiferous ether." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory

    The true statement is (A):

    https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq

    The statement (B) proved extremely malignant. Its metastases killed the whole branch of science called "physics", as the following texts imply:

    Bryan Wallace: "Einstein's special relativity theory with his second postulate that the speed of light in space is constant is the linchpin that holds the whole range of modern physics theories together. Shatter this postulate, and modern physics becomes
    an elaborate farce!...The speed of light is c+v." http://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/2013/02/the-farce-of-physics-2/ Note: Bryan Wallace wrote "The Farce of Physics" on his deathbed so one should not judge him too severely for (numerous)
    imperfections.

    Joao Magueijo, Niayesh Afshordi: "The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/
    8q87gk/light-speed-slowed

    "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

    "If there's one thing every schoolboy knows about Einstein and his theory of relativity, it is that the speed of light in vacuum is constant. No matter what the circumstances, light in vacuum travels at the same speed...The speed of light is the very
    keystone of physics, the seemingly sure foundation upon which every modern cosmological theory is built, the yardstick by which everything in the universe is measured...The constancy of the speed of light has been woven into the very fabric of physics,
    into the way physics equations are written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics." https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/
    dp/0738205257

    Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lou@21:1/5 to Pentcho Valev on Sun Apr 2 05:50:04 2023
    On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 01:52:54 UTC+1, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    There is absolute truth in science. Of the following two statements one is absolutely true, the other is false:

    (A) The speed of light, as measured by the observer (receiver), varies with the speed of the emitter.

    (B) The speed of light, as measured by the observer (receiver), does not vary with the speed of the emitter.

    Einstein hesitated between (A), a tenet of Newton's theory, and (B), a tenet of the ether theory, and finally chose (B) as his 1905 second postulate:

    Einstein: "I introduced the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light, which I borrowed from H. A. Lorentz's theory of the stationary luminiferous ether." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_ether_theory

    The true statement is (A):

    https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq

    The statement (B) proved extremely malignant. Its metastases killed the whole branch of science called "physics", as the following texts imply:

    Bryan Wallace: "Einstein's special relativity theory with his second postulate that the speed of light in space is constant is the linchpin that holds the whole range of modern physics theories together. Shatter this postulate, and modern physics
    becomes an elaborate farce!...The speed of light is c+v." http://www.kritik-relativitaetstheorie.de/2013/02/the-farce-of-physics-2/ Note: Bryan Wallace wrote "The Farce of Physics" on his deathbed so one should not judge him too severely for (numerous)
    imperfections.

    Joao Magueijo, Niayesh Afshordi: "The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/
    8q87gk/light-speed-slowed

    If one reads this Vice article about Joao’s variable speed of light he actually
    is just being the usual dishonest relativist.
    He isn’t saying lightspeed can be variable now. He is saying
    that over billions of years the fundamental nature
    of the universe changed and that light used to travel
    at different speeds nearer to the beginning of the imaginary Big Bang.
    It’s a trick mathematicians do when the observations show
    that mathematicians like Joao and Albert should stop pretending
    they know anything at all about theoretical physics.
    Joao does this not to challenge the veracity of theoretical excrement flowing out
    his divine leader Alberts rear end. But rather to save Einsteins and his nonsense
    when all recent observations contradict predictions made by the BBT.
    The BBT, which of course is based on the assumption that Einstein wasnt
    a low IQ patent clerk.

    "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

    "If there's one thing every schoolboy knows about Einstein and his theory of relativity, it is that the speed of light in vacuum is constant. No matter what the circumstances, light in vacuum travels at the same speed...The speed of light is the very
    keystone of physics, the seemingly sure foundation upon which every modern cosmological theory is built, the yardstick by which everything in the universe is measured...The constancy of the speed of light has been woven into the very fabric of physics,
    into the way physics equations are written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics." https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/
    dp/0738205257

    Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Sun Apr 2 07:45:05 2023
    Doppler effect - when an observer moves towards a stationary light source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE.

    (A) The motion of the observer does not change the wavelength of the incoming light, so frequency and speed of light vary proportionally for the observer, in violation of Einstein's relativity.

    (B) The motion of the observer does change the wavelength of the incoming light so that the speed of light can gloriously remain constant for the moving observer.

    The true statement, of course, is (A). This is obvious even in Einstein's schizophrenic world:

    "The wavelength is staying the same in this case." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHepfIIsKcE

    "Thus, the moving observer sees a wave possessing the same wavelength...but a different frequency...to that seen by the stationary observer." http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/315/Waveshtml/node41.html

    "Vo is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocity is independent of the motion of the source. Hence, the velocity of waves relative to the observer is c + Vo...The motion of an observer does not alter the wavelength. The
    increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time." http://a-levelphysicstutor.com/wav-doppler.php

    The statement (B) is too preposterous, even by the standards of the Einstein Cult, so Einsteinians do not teach it explicitly. Sometimes high priests in the Einstein Cult do teach it but, in order to confuse the public and paralyse any criticism, they
    say that that the observer "sees" the wavelength changed (the public should desperately commute between "there is no real change" and "there IS real change"):

    Kip Thorne: "If you move toward the [light] source, you see the wavelength shortened but you don't see the speed changed." https://youtu.be/mvdlN4H4T54?t=296

    John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the
    frequency of the light to have increased (and correspondingly for the wavelength - the distance between crests - to have decreased)." http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang_observed/index.html

    Pentcho Valev https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)