1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ASTRO

  • =?UTF-8?Q?_Newton=27s_Variable_Speed_of_Light_c=27_=3D_c_=C2=B1_v?=

    From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Wed Feb 16 15:48:23 2022
    Einstein: "If the speed of light depends even in the least on the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity, including the theory of gravitation, is wrong." https://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol5-trans/376

    The speed of light does depend on the speed of the source, as per Newton:

    "Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name most often associated with
    emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then
    expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

    So in 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light, c'=c±v. The crucial question is:

    Was the experiment simultaneously, in 1887, compatible with the constant speed of light, c'=c, posited by the ether theory and "borrowed" by Einstein in 1905?

    The answer "yes" is too blatantly fraudulent, even by the standards of the Einstein cult, so Einsteinians don't discuss this question. Only Banesh Hoffmann did, but his implicit answer was "no":

    "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train
    at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus
    automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms
    of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.
    com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768

    See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 01:14:54 2022
    In 1905 Albert Einstein found it profitable to introduce an axiom that he had "borrowed" from the theory of the nonexistent ether:

    Albert 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 constancy is obvious nonsense. Einstein wrestled with his conscience "over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair" before introducing it:

    John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem
    over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

    Equidistant light pulses and an observer/receiver starts moving towards the source with speed v:

    https://www.einstein-online.info/wp-content/uploads/SRT_Dopplereffekt_Pulse_4_%C2%A9_Daniela_Leitner_Markus_Poessel_Einstein-Online.gif

    The speed of the light pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, as per Newton's theory and in violation of Einstein's relativity.

    The speed of the pulses relative to the observer will be calculated to remain constant, c'=c, and Einstein's relativity will be saved, if one postulates, ad hoc, that the motion of the observer somehow shifts the distance between subsequent pulses from d
    to d'=dc/(c+v). This is the ONLY way to save relativity.

    The problem is that the ad hoc postulate is just as obviously idiotic as Big Brother's fundamental postulate 2+2=5.

    See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 01:18:48 2022
    In 1905 Albert Einstein found it profitable to introduce an axiom that he had "borrowed" from the theory of the nonexistent ether:

    Albert 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 constancy is obvious nonsense. Einstein wrestled with his conscience "over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair" before introducing it:

    John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this problem
    over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

    Equidistant light pulses and an observer/receiver starts moving towards the source with speed v:

    https://www.einstein-online.info/wp-content/uploads/SRT_Dopplereffekt_Pulse_4_%C2%A9_Daniela_Leitner_Markus_Poessel_Einstein-Online.gif

    The speed of the light pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, as per Newton's theory and in violation of Einstein's relativity.

    The speed of the pulses relative to the observer will be calculated to remain constant, c'=c, and Einstein's relativity will be saved, if one postulates, ad hoc, that the motion of the observer somehow shifts the distance between subsequent pulses from d
    to d'=dc/(c+v). This is the ONLY way to save relativity.

    The problem is that the ad hoc postulate is just as obviously idiotic as Big Brother's fundamental postulate 2+2=5.

    More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lou@21:1/5 to Pentcho Valev on Thu Feb 17 05:00:06 2022
    On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 09:18:51 UTC, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    In 1905 Albert Einstein found it profitable to introduce an axiom that he had "borrowed" from the theory of the nonexistent ether:

    Albert 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 constancy is obvious nonsense. Einstein wrestled with his conscience "over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair" before introducing it:

    John Stachel: "But this seems to be nonsense. How can it happen that the speed of light relative to an observer cannot be increased or decreased if that observer moves towards or away from a light beam? Einstein states that he wrestled with this
    problem over a lengthy period of time, to the point of despair." http://www.aip.org/history/exhibits/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm

    Equidistant light pulses and an observer/receiver starts moving towards the source with speed v:

    https://www.einstein-online.info/wp-content/uploads/SRT_Dopplereffekt_Pulse_4_%C2%A9_Daniela_Leitner_Markus_Poessel_Einstein-Online.gif

    The speed of the light pulses relative to the observer shifts from c to c'=c+v, as per Newton's theory and in violation of Einstein's relativity.

    The speed of the pulses relative to the observer will be calculated to remain constant, c'=c, and Einstein's relativity will be saved, if one postulates, ad hoc, that the motion of the observer somehow shifts the distance between subsequent pulses from
    d to d'=dc/(c+v). This is the ONLY way to save relativity.

    The problem is that the ad hoc postulate is just as obviously idiotic as Big Brother's fundamental postulate 2+2=5.

    More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    Pentcho Valev

    I think there is a very deliberate timing on alberts photoelectric and SR papers.
    He knew SR wouldn’t gain any traction with the theorists of the day unless they
    accepted that light wasn’t a wave. Which was the prevailing theory at the time.
    Hence the photoelectric paper coming out ..BEFORE his paper on SR.
    Good thing too. Atomic Spectra analysis was just coming into existence and sooner or later someone would have realised that if atoms emit light in discreet frequencies then they are acting as resonant systems. And the photo electric effect would have been understood more correctly as sympathetic resonance in atoms. Absorbing wave only light of certain frequencies only.
    At which point Albert would have quite rightly never got out of his patent job and turned physics into the snake oil theology it has become today.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 17 15:20:05 2022
    John Norton unwittingly exposes Einsteinians ("later writers") as blatant liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this experiment is "fully compatible with an emission
    theory of light that contradicts the light postulate":

    John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that
    Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-
    Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf

    Understandably, John Norton, a high priest in the Einstein cult, is trying to exonerate Einstein. Actually, Einstein was the author of the Michelson-Morley-experiment hoax - he devised it in 1921:

    The New York Times, April 19, 1921: "The special relativity arose from the question of whether light had an invariable velocity in free space, he [Einstein] said. The velocity of light could only be measured relative to a body or a co-ordinate system. He
    sketched a co-ordinate system K to which light had a velocity C. Whether the system was in motion or not was the fundamental principle. This has been developed through the researches of Maxwell and Lorentz, the principle of the constancy of the velocity
    of light having been based on many of their experiments. But did it hold for only one system? he asked. He gave the example of a street and a vehicle moving on that street. If the velocity of light was C for the street was it also C for the vehicle? If a
    second co-ordinate system K was introduced, moving with the velocity V, did light have the velocity of C here? When the light traveled the system moved with it, so it would appear that light moved slower and the principle apparently did not hold. Many
    famous experiments had been made on this point. Michelson showed that relative to the moving co-ordinate system K1, the light traveled with the same velocity as relative to K, which is contrary to the above observation. How could this be reconciled?
    Professor Einstein asked." https://ebay.com/itm/ALBERT-EINSTEIN-Lecture-on-SPEED-OF-LIGHT-Time-1st-Visit-to-US-1921-Newspaper/373400655156

    See more: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

    Pentcho Valev

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