• Einstein's Relativity: Victorious War against Human Mind

    From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Sun Feb 20 14:17:28 2022
    Jacques Maritain, Oeuvres complètes, Volume 3, p. 285: Il ne reste plus alors qu'à avouer que la théorie [d'Einstein], si l'on donnait une signification ontologiquement réelle aux entités qu'elle met en jeu, comporterait des absurdités; entiè
    rement logique et cohérente comme système hypothético-déductif et synthèse mathématique des phénomènes, elle n'est pas, malgré les prétensions de ses partisans, une philosophie de la nature, parce que le principe de la constance de la vitesse
    de la lumière, sur lequel elle s'appuie, ne peut pas être ontologiquement vrai. p. 300: La science, même la plus mélangée d'hypothétique et de probable, même la moins élevée en intellectualité, la science est chose bonne en elle-même, et qui dÃ
    ©tient une étincelle divine. On a vu toutefois ce qu'elle peut produire, lorsqu'elle est employée par l'homme, en fait de ruines matérielles et de destructions sanglantes. Les désastres qu'en usant d'elle les apprentis sorciers peuvent provoquer dans
    l'ordre de l'esprit, pour être invisibles, ne sont pas moins énormes. http://www.amazon.ca/Oeuvres-compl%C3%A8tes-Jacques-Maritain/dp/2850492752

    The aftermath: The defeated human mind sees deep truth in idiocies like these:

    Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken
    experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can
    jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can
    experience it "in a minute")." http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf

    LIGO fakers: "The fact that the speed of gravitational waves is equal to the speed of electromagnetic waves is simply because they both travel at the speed of information." https://discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/why-does-gravity-travel-at-the-speed-of-
    light

    "Einstein pulled all of these ideas together in his 1905 theory of special relativity, which postulated that the speed of light was a constant. For this to be true, space and time had to be combined into a single framework that conspired to keep light's
    speed the same for all observers." https://www.livescience.com/space-time.html

    "In special relativity, the speed of light remains constant by allowing both space and time to change in such a way as to keep the speed of light constant." https://coursehero.com/tutors-problems/Physics/28577046-According-to-special-relativity-the-speed-
    of-light-is-the-same-for-al/

    Michelle Thaller: "All of the universe shifts around this constant, the speed of light." https://youtube.com/watch?v=DO7J2YIz8tY

    Brian Greene: "If space and time did not behave this way, the speed of light would not be constant and would depend on the observer's state of motion. But it is constant; space and time do behave this way. Space and time adjust themselves in an exactly
    compensating manner so that observations of light's speed yield the same result, regardless of the observer's velocity." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/special-relativity-nutshell.html

    Neil deGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries, pp. 123-124: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as
    the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul
    out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is a COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER." https://www.amazon.com/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-
    Quandaries/dp/039335038X

    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 Mon Feb 21 12:35:43 2022
    "The two first articles (January and March) establish clearly a discontinuous structure of matter and light. The standard look of Einstein's SR is, on the contrary, essentially based on the continuous conception of the field." http://arxiv.org/ftp/
    physics/papers/0101/0101109.pdf

    "Einstein's March paper treated light as particles, but special relativity sees light as a continuous field of waves." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/genius/

    Albert Einstein (1954): "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also nothing
    of the rest of contemporary physics." John Stachel, Einstein from 'B' to 'Z', p. 151 https://www.amazon.com/Einstein-B-Z-John-Stachel/dp/0817641432

    Feynman unwittingly confirms that "physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures":

    Richard Feynman: "I want to emphasize that light comes in this form - particles. It is very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially for those of you who have gone to school, where you probably learned something about light
    behaving like waves. I'm telling you the way it does behave - like particles. You might say that it's just the photomultiplier that detects light as particles, but no, every instrument that has been designed to be sensitive enough to detect weak light
    has always ended up discovering the same thing: light is made of particles." https://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Theory-Light-Matter/dp/0691024170

    See 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 Tue Feb 22 05:31:06 2022
    On Monday, 21 February 2022 at 20:35:46 UTC, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    "The two first articles (January and March) establish clearly a discontinuous structure of matter and light. The standard look of Einstein's SR is, on the contrary, essentially based on the continuous conception of the field." http://arxiv.org/ftp/
    physics/papers/0101/0101109.pdf

    "Einstein's March paper treated light as particles, but special relativity sees light as a continuous field of waves." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/genius/

    Albert Einstein (1954): "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures. Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the theory of gravitation, but also
    nothing of the rest of contemporary physics." John Stachel, Einstein from 'B' to 'Z', p. 151 https://www.amazon.com/Einstein-B-Z-John-Stachel/dp/0817641432

    Feynman unwittingly confirms that "physics cannot be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures":

    Richard Feynman: "I want to emphasize that light comes in this form - particles. It is very important to know that light behaves like particles, especially for those of you who have gone to school, where you probably learned something about light
    behaving like waves. I'm telling you the way it does behave - like particles. You might say that it's just the photomultiplier that detects light as particles, but no, every instrument that has been designed to be sensitive enough to detect weak light
    has always ended up discovering the same thing: light is made of particles." https://www.amazon.com/QED-Strange-Theory-Light-Matter/dp/0691024170
    See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
    l
    I would dispute his paper on SR does not treat light as a particle. It does treat
    light ray as a wave for convenience when transforming between frames but it also accepts that particles exist. And describes how they are affected by his wacky theory. Notice his constant reference to clocks. In 1905 there were no digital clocks or atomic clocks. Notice these clocks of his are...PARTICLES. Fact is he couldn’t have gotten away with his pure nonsense SR paper if he had not already conned the low IQ physics community with his photoelectric paper.
    Looking at his 1905 paper on SR, he seems to have understood that Maxwell
    got it wrong somehow, in his opening paragraph about moving magnets and conductors. An interesting point he raises as it highlites the problems with theory about electromagnetism and induction. They are based on the false assumption that electrons exist. Total nonsense.
    Fact is if you move a magnet it rotates the magnetic fields of the atoms in the conductor. Which creates the current.
    Or if you move the conductor and not the magnet the same thing happens.
    The moving conductor has its atoms magnetic fields rotated because they
    are moving relative to the magnet.
    So Einstein, to his credit, realised Maxwell and the then current dogma
    was incorrect. But then fixed the problem with another load of nonsense.
    He kept the imaginary electron, and tried to correct it with Relativity.
    Kind of like the way Big Bang nutters try to correct their theory and
    it’s failure to predict observations . By inventing another wacko
    unverified piece of nonsense..dark matter. To compensate for the
    fact that their theory failed.

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