1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ASTRO

  • Brian Greene Brainwashes the Scientific Community

    From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 19 05:10:07 2022
    Brian Greene informs the scientific community that, according to Einstein's special relativity, the moving clock is running slow and the stationary clock is running fast:

    https://youtu.be/Q1y3YnPgaY4?t=1157

    This is a lie (there is no time dilation), but note that this also contradicts the logic of special relativity. "Moving clock slow, stationary clock fast" is non sequitur - it does not follow from Einstein's 1905 postulates.

    What follows from Einstein's 1905 postulates? Here is the valid deduction:

    If two clocks are in relative motion, either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system.

    This is quite different from what Brian Greene teaches, isn't it? Needless to say, the scientific community couldn't care less about the difference. In an ideology, truth does not matter:

    "This paper investigates an alternative possibility: that the critics were right and that the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity
    theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies, however, make the theory ideologically powerful...The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and research institutes are
    disinclined to support or employ anyone who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are then
    able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics. Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of elementary logical errors, they would be faced with the embarrassing question of why this had not been noticed earlier.
    Under these circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the theory and their own reputations by shutting
    their opponents out of professional discourse...The triumph of relativity theory represents the triumph of ideology not only in the profession of physics bur also in the philosophy of science." Peter Hayes, The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the
    Clock Paradox https://tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02691720902741399

    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 Sep 19 13:30:50 2022
    Why do Brian Greene and all other high priests in the Einstein cult, Einstein included, abuse the logic of special relativity? Because the valid deduction ("either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system") doesn't, but the non sequitur ("
    moving clock is slow, stationary clock is fast") does imply TIME TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE - the miracle (idiocy) that converted Einstein into a deity:

    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

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

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Trolidan7@21:1/5 to Pentcho Valev on Sun Oct 2 12:27:14 2022
    On 9/19/22 5:10 AM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    Brian Greene informs the scientific community that, according to Einstein's special relativity, the moving clock is running slow and the stationary clock is running fast:
    ...

    Is the 'speed of light' (or electromagnetic like radiation) 'constant' regardless of its 'frequency'?

    In other words, is 'red shifted' light slower than 'blue shifted' light?

    Is there something 'practical' that might work or not work if it was
    not 'constant' regardless of 'red shifts' or 'blue shifts' or the
    relative speed of an object emitting or receiving the light or maybe 'electromagnetic radiation'?

    Well there is something at least somewhat 'practical' that could
    make that a 'maybe'.

    It is abbreviated with the letters 'RADAR'. Does it work or
    doesn't it?

    ...

    Pentcho Valev

    Then there is the strange word 'brainwashing' in the title
    of the post.

    If you dip a brain in water, will it 'loose its memories'
    but then be available to receive new ones if it is taken
    out of water again?

    Well if the brain is outside of the body, then how did it
    get there?

    If it is unattached to other nerves then there would be
    a problem growing new connections or nerves after it was
    unattached. There are some nerves that do not go through
    the spinal cord that take inputs from the eyes and send
    outputs to the muscles of the face or lips, but no head
    transplant, much less brain transplants have ever been
    done so you have speculation and more speculation.

    I get the idea from reading books derived from thousands
    of years ago that people once thought that the heart or
    liver were the seat of the 'mind' or 'soul' in the body
    rather than the brain. They once thought that the purpose
    of the brain was to 'cool the blood' or something like
    that. Nonetheless people were able to have ideas if time
    existed back then, regardless of what ideas thay had about
    how ideas themselves were formed or came into existence.
    Thus theories or ideas, and theories or ideas about how
    theories or ideas come into existence, are two different
    things. Theories or ideas about how theories or ideas come
    into existence are a subset of all theories or ideas. People
    can still have theories or ideas, however, regardless what
    theories they believe in about how theories and ideas come
    into existence. This can be a severe flaw in logic if people
    do not remember this.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Trolidan7@21:1/5 to Pentcho Valev on Sun Oct 2 13:03:38 2022
    On 9/19/22 1:30 PM, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    Why do Brian Greene and all other high priests in the Einstein cult, Einstein included, abuse the logic of special relativity? Because the valid deduction
    ...

    Actually the statement about head transplants is false.

    I just looked it up and it might have been done on
    mice as far back as 2015.

    https://time.com/3911435/mice-transplant-head-china/

    ...
    Pentcho Valev


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