Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: Pentcho Valev on 20/07/2006 09:31:25
-
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf
"The Second Law made its appearance in physics around 1850, but a half century later it was already surrounded by so much confusion that the British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to appoint a special committee with the task of providing clarity about the meaning of this law. However, its final report (Bryan 1891) did not settle the issue. Half a century later, the physicist/philosopher Bridgman still complained that there are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been discussions of it (Bridgman 1941, p. 116). And even today, the Second Law remains so obscure that it continues to attract new efforts at clarification. A recent example is the work of Lieb and Yngvason (1999)......The historian of science and mathematician Truesdell made a detailed study of the historical development of thermodynamics in the period 1822-1854. He characterises the theory, even in its present state, as 'a dismal swamp of obscurity' (1980, p. 6) and 'a prime example to show that physicists are not exempt from the madness of crowds' (ibid. p. 8).......Clausius' verbal statement of the second law makes no sense.... All that remains is a Mosaic prohibition ; a century of philosophers and journalists have acclaimed this commandment ; a century of mathematicians have shuddered and averted their eyes from the unclean.....Seven times in the past thirty years have I tried to follow the argument Clausius offers....and seven times has it blanked and gravelled me.... I cannot explain what I cannot understand."
http://www.ekkehard-friebe.de/wallace.htm
"Shatter this postulate [of constancy of the speed of light], and
modern physics becomes an elaborate farce!"
Einstein: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false."
Einstein: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051128/full/nj7068-705a.html
http://www.nyas.org/publications/UpdateUnbound.asp?UpdateID=41
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/04/physics_in_america_at_crossroa.html
http://insidehighered.com/views/2006/04/13/morley
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2006/02/testing_times_for_einsteins_th.html
Pentcho Valev
-
I believe Einstein did try to disprove his theory (SR) based on the constancy of the velocity of light (c) but gave up on this project. Later in his life, he did try to disprove some of his own theories. So that is the way of science.
Doc
-
quote:
Originally posted by DocN
I believe Einstein did try to disprove his theory (SR) based on the constancy of the velocity of light (c) but gave up on this project. Later in his life, he did try to disprove some of his own theories. So that is the way of science.
Doc
POSTSCIENTISM AND 2+2=5
In a sense, Einstein's theory is Newton's theory where a true premise - the speed of light does depend on the speed of the light source - has been temporarily replaced with its negation - the speed of light is independent of the speed of the source - which is false. It is as if I had appropriated someone else's mathematical system where my only contribution was to replace 2+2=4 with 2+2=5, thereby extracting profit from miracles that follow (for instance, my premise 2+2=5 would allow me to "prove" that, in some cases, a(b+b )>(ab+ab)). As far as the ideological situation is concerned, George Orwell's description is perfect:
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"
In the era of Postscientism the old "Veni, Vidi, Vici" has been replaced by "Introduce absurdity, Destroy rationality, Become divinity". Einstein was not the first activist. The process started in 1850 when Clausius introduced the absurdity establishing that the maximal efficiency of heat engines is independent of "the nature of the substance by means of which the work is done":
http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
Pentcho Valev
-
WORDS THAT DESTROYED RATIONALITY IN SCIENCE
http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
http://www.mdpi.org/lin/clausius/clausius.htm
Rudolf Clausius, Ueber die bewegende Kraft der Wärme, Annalen der Physik und Chemie, 79, 368-97, 500-24 (1850):
"The ONLY change will occur in the distribution of the heat, since more heat will be transferred from B to A than from A to B, and so on the whole heat will be transferred from B to A. By repeating these two processes alternately it would be possible, without any expenditure of force OR ANY OTHER CHANGE, to transfer as much heat as we please from a cold to a hot body, and this is not in accord with the other relations of heat, since it always shows a tendency to equalize temperature differences and therefore to pass from hotter to colder bodies."
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, By A. Einstein, June 30, 1905:
"We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the "Principle of Relativity'') to the status of a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is INDEPENDENT OF THE STATE OF MOTION OF THE EMITTING BODY."
Ilya Prigogine, From Being to Becoming, Freeman and Co, 1980, p. 5:
"We must distinguish TWO TERMS IN THE ENTROPY CHANGE, dS: the first, deS, is the transfer of entropy across the boundaries of the system; the second, diS, is the entropy produced within the system."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
quote:
Originally posted by DocN
I believe Einstein did try to disprove his theory (SR) based on the constancy of the velocity of light (c) but gave up on this project. Later in his life, he did try to disprove some of his own theories. So that is the way of science.
Doc
POSTSCIENTISM AND 2+2=5
In a sense, Einstein's theory is Newton's theory where a true premise - the speed of light does depend on the speed of the light source - has been temporarily replaced with its negation - the speed of light is independent of the speed of the source - which is false. It is as if I had appropriated someone else's mathematical system where my only contribution was to replace 2+2=4 with 2+2=5, thereby extracting profit from miracles that follow (for instance, my premise 2+2=5 would allow me to "prove" that, in some cases, a(b+b )>(ab+ab)). As far as the ideological situation is concerned, George Orwell's description is perfect:
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"
In the era of Postscientism the old "Veni, Vidi, Vici" has been replaced by "Introduce absurdity, Destroy rationality, Become divinity". Einstein was not the first activist. The process started in 1850 when Clausius introduced the absurdity establishing that the maximal efficiency of heat engines is independent of "the nature of the substance by means of which the work is done":
http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
Pentcho Valev
-
WORDS THAT DESTROYED RATIONALITY IN SCIENCE
http://web.lemoyne.edu/~giunta/Clausius.html
http://www.mdpi.org/lin/clausius/clausius.htm
Rudolf Clausius, Ueber die bewegende Kraft der Wärme, Annalen der Physik und Chemie, 79, 368-97, 500-24 (1850):
"The ONLY change will occur in the distribution of the heat, since more heat will be transferred from B to A than from A to B, and so on the whole heat will be transferred from B to A. By repeating these two processes alternately it would be possible, without any expenditure of force OR ANY OTHER CHANGE, to transfer as much heat as we please from a cold to a hot body, and this is not in accord with the other relations of heat, since it always shows a tendency to equalize temperature differences and therefore to pass from hotter to colder bodies."
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies, By A. Einstein, June 30, 1905:
"We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the "Principle of Relativity'') to the status of a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is INDEPENDENT OF THE STATE OF MOTION OF THE EMITTING BODY."
Ilya Prigogine, From Being to Becoming, Freeman and Co, 1980, p. 5:
"We must distinguish TWO TERMS IN THE ENTROPY CHANGE, dS: the first, deS, is the transfer of entropy across the boundaries of the system; the second, diS, is the entropy produced within the system."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
WHY EINSTEIN WAS FED UP WITH RELATIVITY IN 1921
A suggestion:
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/07/einsteins_theory_of_infidelity.html
Pentcho Valev
-
EINSTEIN: ETHER PARTLY EXISTS
Somewhat paradoxically, Einstein's deification is due to his mediocrity. What thinkers like Poincare regarded as dismal absurdity, e.g. I measure your clock to be slower than mine and you measure mine to be slower than yours, was offered by Einstein to the dazed world in combination with superimposed absurdities: I measure your clock to be slower than mine and you measure mine to be slower than yours but if you go and return you will find mine to be FASTER than yours.
Yet, although Einstein showered the dazed world with absurdities, he was extremely sensitive to potential danger (like any other juggler). So for Einstein ether did exist but only in a sense in which this existence did not threaten the divine theory:
http://www.tu-harburg.de/rzt/rzt/it/Ether.html :
"Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable..."
Pentcho Valev
-
FAREWELL TO PHYSICS
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/francis_sedgemore/2006/08/sedgemore_says.html
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
Ok, the article points out that there is a big problem persuading physics graduates to teach the subject. This problem is sociogical rather than fundamental to the subject. What is your point?
-
quote:
Originally posted by daveshorts
Ok, the article points out that there is a big problem persuading physics graduates to teach the subject. This problem is sociogical rather than fundamental to the subject. What is your point?
The title of the article shows that things are more serious than that. See also
http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/news/newsarchive2006/ceer-physics-2.html
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/04/physics_in_america_at_crossroa.html
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051128/full/nj7068-705a.html
http://insidehighered.com/views/2006/04/13/morley
http://www.nyas.org/publications/UpdateUnbound.asp?UpdateID=41
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2006/02/testing_times_for_einsteins_th.html
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
All the ones I could be bothered to read were about the drop in student numbers dong Physics. I would have thought this has a few causes: Students would rather do something less challenging, biology is more fashionable, the shortage of physicists is causing a shortage of good physics teachers, you can't take things apart to learn how they work any more etc etc. It doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the theory.
-
The answer to this thread is "none of them".
-
quote:
Originally posted by daveshorts
All the ones I could be bothered to read were about the drop in student numbers dong Physics. I would have thought this has a few causes: Students would rather do something less challenging, biology is more fashionable, the shortage of physicists is causing a shortage of good physics teachers, you can't take things apart to learn how they work any more etc etc. It doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the theory.
ACCELERATION OF PHOTONS AND EINSTEIN'S SECOND POSTULATE
http://blogs.physicstoday.org/newspicks/2006/07/light_goes_faster_in_reverse.html
Pentcho Valev
-
THE HONESTY OF EINSTEIN'S HYPNOTISTS IS INCREASING
Einstein's hypnotists don't camouflage anymore the fact that the speed of light is variable, not constant:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html
"Einstein went on to discover a more general theory of relativity which explained gravity in terms of curved spacetime, and he talked about the speed of light changing in this new theory. In the 1920 book "Relativity: the special and general theory" he wrote: . . . according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity [. . .] cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Since Einstein talks of velocity (a vector quantity: speed with direction) rather than speed alone, it is not clear that he meant the speed will change, but the reference to special relativity suggests that he did mean so."
Why is hypnotists' honesty increasing? Because hypnotists feel much more comfortable now: the voice of Einstein's zombies has been reduced to a simple echo. For instance:
The hypnotist: CONSTANT! Zombies' echo: CONSTANT, CONStant, constant.....
The hypnotist: VARIABLE! Zombies' echo: VARIABLE, VARIable, variable......
Pentcho Valev
-
THE HONESTY OF EINSTEIN'S HYPNOTISTS IS INCREASING
Einstein's hypnotists don't camouflage anymore the fact that the speed of light is variable, not constant:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html
"Einstein went on to discover a more general theory of relativity which explained gravity in terms of curved spacetime, and he talked about the speed of light changing in this new theory. In the 1920 book "Relativity: the special and general theory" he wrote: . . . according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity [. . .] cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Since Einstein talks of velocity (a vector quantity: speed with direction) rather than speed alone, it is not clear that he meant the speed will change, but the reference to special relativity suggests that he did mean so."
Why is hypnotists' honesty increasing? Because hypnotists feel much more comfortable now: the voice of Einstein's zombies has been reduced to a simple echo. For instance:
The hypnotist: CONSTANT! Zombies' echo: CONSTANT, CONStant, constant.....
The hypnotist: VARIABLE! Zombies' echo: VARIABLE, VARIable, variable......
Pentcho Valev
-
WHY EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT IS NECESSARY
In 1911 Albert Einstein showed that in a gravitational field the speed of light is variable:
c' = c + V/c /1/
where V is the gravitational potential. By applying the equivalence principle one could easily convert /1/ into
c' = c + v /2/
where v is the relative speed of the light source and the observer in the absence of a gravitational field. Then one could remember Einstein's words: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false", and the catastrophe would be irreversible.
Only a criminal cult can replace an imminent tragedy with an eternal happiness where money flows vigorously and trouble-makers are nipped in the bud.
Pentcho Valev
-
ILYA PRIGOGINE: GREATER THAN EINSTEIN
Von Neumann once said:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00000313/00/engtot.pdf
"No one knows what entropy really is..."
That is, the concept contains maximum obscurity and nobody, not even Einstein, could introduce more obscurity. Perhaps Von Neumann did not know what Prigogine was able to do. He simply combined two incommensurable equations (eqs. 4.2 and 4.3' in I.Prigogine, "From Being to Becoming", Freeman and Co, 1980), obtained a new absurd expression for the entropy (eq. 4.13) and so converted the most obscure concept in science into a commodity-like entity part of which is produced within the system and the rest is imported: "We must distinguish TWO TERMS IN THE ENTROPY CHANGE, dS: the first, deS, is the transfer of entropy across the boundaries of the system; the second, diS, is the entropy produced within the system." (Prigogine's book, p. 5).
Needless to say, Prigogine was awarded the Nobel prize for this development of the obscurity.
Pentcho Valev
-
EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT DEAD?
Eric Gisse wrote in sci.physics.relativity:
> Pentcho Valev wrote:
> > In 1911 Albert Einstein showed that in a gravitational field the speed
> > of light is variable:
>
> Who cares? 1911 was 4 years before 1915, which was when General
> Relativity was complete.
There has never been so much confusion and despair in Einstein's criminal cult. That must be the end. See also the discussion in the NATURE newsblog:
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2006/02/testing_times_for_einsteins_th.html
Both hypnotists and zombies should sing "Divine Einstein" for the last time and try to find some more profitable business.
http://www.haverford.edu/physics-astro/songs/divine.htm :
Divine Einstein! by Marian McKenzie & Walter Smith
(To the tune of “I’m Lookin’ Over a Four-leaf Clover”)
No-one’s as dee-vine as Albert Einstein
Not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr!
He explained the photo-electric effect,
And launched quantum physics with his intellect!
His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel --
He should have been given four!
No-one’s as dee-vine as Albert Einstein,
Professor with brains galore!
No-one could outshine Professor Einstein --
Egad, could that guy derive!
He gave us special relativity,
That’s always made him a hero to me!
Brownian motion, my true devotion,
He mastered back in aught-five!
No-one’s as dee-vine as Albert Einstein,
Professor in overdrive!
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
THE LAST CONVULSION OF EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT
Einstein's cult has spent billions of dollars for the destruction of human rationality and the success is remarkable. In 1960 Pound and Rebka measured the gravitational redshift: their result confirmed Einstein's formula c'=c+V/c, where c' is the VARIABLE speed of light in a gravitational field, c is the initial speed of light relative to the light source and V is the gravitational potential. By applying the equivalence principle one can easily deduce c'=c+v, where c' is the VARIABLE speed of light in the absence of a gravitational field and v is the relative speed of the light source and the observer. Clearly, the gravitational redshift is fatal for Einstein's theory and modern physics in general. Yet the destroyed human rationality has been misled into believing that the redshift is a glorious confirmation of Einstein's divinity.
However happiness cannot be eternal and after 100 years of uncontrolled outrages Einstein's cult will have to disappear. Its last convulsion can be seen in
http://www.physorg.com/news77373279.html
where the gravitational redshift is shown to confirm, for the last time, the divine theory.
Pentcho Valev
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
ILYA PRIGOGINE: GREATER THAN EINSTEIN
Ilya Prigogine is the same person who (in his late years, I think) state that theory of chickens able to make a nuclear reaction to transform Potassium into Calcium, isnt'it? You want to make a comparison between such a person and Einstein? You need a lot of courage!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
ILYA PRIGOGINE: GREATER THAN EINSTEIN
Ilya Prigogine is the same person who (in his late years, I think) state that theory of chickens able to make a nuclear reaction to transform Potassium into Calcium, isnt'it? You want to make a comparison between such a person and Einstein? You need a lot of courage!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
... force of gravity works? Or ...
Pentcho Valev
This is a common missconception. Gravity is not a force. The force is the product of mass and the strength of the gravitational filed, ie, the quotient of the ratio force/mass.
Big Tim
-
VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT AND EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT
The main concern of Einstein's hypnotists is to camouflage the fact that the speed of light does depend on the speed of the light source and therefore Einstein's theory (and modern physics in general) is just a farce. The camouflage involves even simulated fights among hypnotists:
http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i23/23a01401.htm
It is easy to see that hypnotists always discuss the idea of variability of the speed of light in a way that has nothing to do with Einstein's original definition of constancy (the speed of light is independent of the speed of the light source). In fact, in 1911 Einstein showed that in a gravitational field the speed of light is VARIABLE:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
By applying the equivalence principle one could easily convert Einstein's formula into
c' = c + v
valid in the absence of a gravitational field, where c is the speed of photons relative to the light source and v is the relative speed of the light source and the observer. Then one could remember Einstein's words:
"If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
First of all, who do you trust more for answers in the field of physics? A physicist or a hypnotist? If I want someone hypnotized, I would not go to a physist. [;)]
Also, you must understand that in a gravitational field, you are accelerating, and thus your frame of reference is non-inertial. You cannot use the basic laws and intuitions of being in an inertial frame when you are in a non-inertial frame.
I have yet to see any argument that the speed of light is affected by the speed of the source. The arguments you provide, although large in number, are all purely rhetorical and not logically based.
-
EINSTEINIANS WILL UNDERSTAND EINSTEIN'S THEORIES
http://universe.nasa.gov/
"Astonishingly, all of these wild ideas are now known to be true. But now we must work toward the next step in our understanding. Einstein's legacy is incomplete - we do not understand the underlying physics of the very phenomena that came out of his theories."
Einsteinians will try to understand Einstein's theories by interpreting them in terms of Newton's particle model of light (that is, in terms of discontinuous structures confirmed by Einstein himself). Einstein has hinted at the final result:
Einstein: "I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
HOW MANY GENERATIONS OF SCIENTISTS HAVE BEEN LOST?
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1890340,00.html
"Part of the problem, say critics, is that, in the Eighties, talented young physicists were encouraged by professors to take up string theory because of its immense promise. Now they are middle-aged department heads who have committed their lives to the subject and cannot see it is bogus. It is the scientific equivalent of the emperor's new clothes."
I think the campaign started much earlier - it is near completion now:
http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/news.asp?id=5215
"Next generation of scientists could be lost say key science organisations"
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
INEVITABILITY IN EINSTEIN'S ZOMBIE WORLD
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/12/physics_protest/ :
"Reading University's department is unlikely to be the only one in the UK that has "dropped below the level of viability". The trouble is, departments can't advertise their vulnerability for fear of losing talented research staff and scaring off prospective students.
"This is why we don't hear about it until it is too late," says Diamond."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
THE LAST SEANCE IN EINSTEIN'S ZOMBIE WORLD
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2404678,00.html :
"PROFESSOR Stephen Hawking, Britain's world-renowned physicist, is to switch from theories of multidimensional space to the three dimensions of the Imax cinema by starring in a film that sets out his ideas on the origins and fate of the universe.....His aim is to popularise science, but for many the appeal could also lie in the ability of an Imax 3D film to make Hawking and his wheelchair appear to come right out of the screen into the audience....Hawking has become a scientific icon, playing himself in episodes of The Simpsons and Star Trek....He is approached by Olivia, a reporter covering religious affairs for The Times, sister paper of The Sunday Times. She is writing a story about cosmology and the meaning of existence to commemorate the work of Albert Einstein and his special theory of relativity.... Mlodinow said that it would also include dramatised interviews with Einstein and other famous physicists such as Richard Feynman. "It will be like Groundhog Day meets Star Trek," he said....One aim of the film will be to silence the critics who point out that although A Brief History of Time sold millions of copies, few people actually get beyond the first few pages."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT AND EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT
The main concern of Einstein's hypnotists is to camouflage the fact that the speed of light does depend on the speed of the light source and therefore Einstein's theory (and modern physics in general) is just a farce. The camouflage involves even simulated fights among hypnotists:
http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i23/23a01401.htm
It is easy to see that hypnotists always discuss the idea of variability of the speed of light in a way that has nothing to do with Einstein's original definition of constancy (the speed of light is independent of the speed of the light source). In fact, in 1911 Einstein showed that in a gravitational field the speed of light is VARIABLE:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
By applying the equivalence principle one could easily convert Einstein's formula into
c' = c + v
valid in the absence of a gravitational field, where c is the speed of photons relative to the light source and v is the relative speed of the light source and the observer. Then one could remember Einstein's words:
"If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false."
1. The velocity vector is not defined, globally, in curves space-times, only locally.
-
EINSTEIN'S HYPNOTISTS PROVE 5=4
One of Einstein's crucial discoveries is the fact that, if the quantity
1/gamma = (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
is replaced by its Taylor approximation 1-v^2/2c^2, Einstein's lies about gravitational time dilation can be camouflaged to some extent. If Einstein had not made this discovery, that is, if the original quantity (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) had remained unchanged, the malignancy called relativity theory would not have killed theoretical science (perhaps).
Einstein's hypnotists do know about the crucial discovery and always replace (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) with 1-v^2/2c^2. Consider Problem 3 "Circular motion", (a) and (b), on p. 15, solution on p. 19, in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch13.pdf
From the solution on p. 19 we have
(a) t_B = t_A (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
(b) t_A = t_B (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) (1+v^2/c^2)
Accordingly
t_A = t_A (1-v^4/c^4)
In other words, Einstein's theory can only be true if 5=4.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
BREATHTAKING REVOLUTION IN PHYSICS
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/connected/2006/09/30/ecphysics30.xml
"Another university to drop physics...In the past decade 19 physics departments have merged or closed."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
EINSTEIN'S HYPNOTISTS PROVE 5=4
One of Einstein's crucial discoveries is the fact that, if the quantity
1/gamma = (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
is replaced by its Taylor approximation 1-v^2/2c^2, Einstein's lies about gravitational time dilation can be camouflaged to some extent. If Einstein had not made this discovery, that is, if the original quantity (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) had remained unchanged, the malignancy called relativity theory would not have killed theoretical science (perhaps).
Einstein's hypnotists do know about the crucial discovery and always replace (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) with 1-v^2/2c^2. Consider Problem 3 "Circular motion", (a) and (b), on p. 15, solution on p. 19, in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch13.pdf
From the solution on p. 19 we have
(a) t_B = t_A (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
(b) t_A = t_B (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2) (1+v^2/c^2)
Accordingly
t_A = t_A (1-v^4/c^4)
In other words, Einstein's theory can only be true if 5=4.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
In that problem, the approximation v<<c is necessary, otherwise it's not possible to write a = v^2/r and
1 + ar/c^2 = 1 + v^2/c^2. This because that equation is valid only on an Euclidean space-time (that is, FLAT) and this is not the case of a curved space-time.
This because a = v^2/r comes from v = omega*r which comes from arc = angle*r which is true only on an Euclidean geometry. Think about a circumference drawn on a spherical surface, for example.
See also:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehrenfest_paradox
quote:
1910: Theodor Kaluza points out that there is nothing inherently paradoxical about the static and disk-riding observers obtaining different results for the circumference. This does however imply, he argues, that "the geometry of the rotating disk" is non-euclidean. He asserts without proof that this geometry is in fact essentially just the geometry of the hyperbolic plane.
Resolution of the paradox
The modern resolution of the "paradox" can be briefly summarized as follows:
1.Small distances measured by disk-riding observers are described by the Langevin-Landau-Lifschitz metric, which is indeed well approximated (for small angular velocity) by the geometry of the hyperbolic plane, just as Kaluza had claimed.
-
EINSTEIN'S ZOMBIE WORLD: BIOLOGISTS WILL TEACH PHYSICS
http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,1881487,00.html
"[We will look at] whether we should be training biology teachers, so that they can become specialist teachers in chemistry and physics."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
RELATIVITY AND SELF-DESTRUCTION
Photons move in a gravitational field and either undergo acceleration (e.g. their speed becomes c'>c=300000km/s) or do not undergo acceleration (that is, their speed remains c=300000km/s). If they undergo acceleration the frequency shift detected by the receiver is due to the variable speed of light, in accordance with the formula c'=Lf', where L is wavelength and f is frequency. If the photons do not undergo acceleration the frequency shift detected by the receiver is due to gravitational time dilation and variable wavelength, in accordance with the formula c=L'f'. It is easy to see that c'=Lf' and c=L'f' are the only possibilities. Roughly speaking, either variable speed of light and no gravitational time dilation, or gravitational time dilation and constant speed of light.
Initially Einstein chose c'=Lf':
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm :
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
However later Einstein had to camouflage the fact that the frequency shift is due to variable speed of light and introduced gravitational time dilation - a concept extremely dangerous for human rationality. Two identical clocks in identical conditions (identical gravitational fields) allegedly have different rates. Rationality is immediately destroyed and the victim starts worshipping both the miracle and its creator.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
quote:
Originally posted by Pentcho Valev
RELATIVITY AND SELF-DESTRUCTION
However later Einstein had to camouflage the fact that the frequency shift is due to variable speed of light and introduced gravitational time dilation - a concept extremely dangerous for human rationality. Two identical clocks in identical conditions (identical gravitational fields) allegedly have different rates. Rationality is immediately destroyed and the victim starts worshipping both the miracle and its creator.
It's not allegedly, gravitational time dilation HAS BEEN PROVED EXPERIMENTALLY with atomic clocks on airplanes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation
quote:
Experimental confirmation
Gravitational time dilation has been experimentally measured using atomic clocks on airplanes. The clocks that traveled aboard the airplanes upon return were slightly fast with respect to clocks on the ground. The effect is significant enough that the Global Positioning System needs to correct for its effect on clocks aboard artificial satellites, providing a further experimental confirmation of the effect.
Gravitational time dilation has also been confirmed by the Pound-Rebka experiment, observations of the spectra of the white dwarf Sirius B and experiments with time signals sent to and from Viking 1 mars lander.
-
THE STRATEGY OF EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT
Conversion of children into zombies should start as early as possible:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/10/25/dl2502.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2006/10/25/ixopinion.html
"The irony is that the present generation of children should be receptive to scientifically sophisticated concepts: any child who watches Doctor Who will have some familiarity with notions such as the relativity of time."
So one day wisdoms equivalent to "I measure you clock to be slower than mine and you measure mine to be slower than yours but if you go and return you will find mine to be faster than yours" will become part of the zombie world's common sense. As a consequence, the process Einstein's criminal cult sees as most important will never stop:
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20061024-105816-8997r.htm
"Death can't stop celebrities from making millions....Rich, famous and dead: Seven musicians, a cartoonist and a theoretical physicist are among the 13 dead celebrities who earned a collective $247 million in the past year on royalties, publishing rights and licensing agreements from their famous names, images and creative works....It is an odd cultural moment indeed when fifth-place winner Albert Einstein manages to earn $20 million, not on his theory of relativity but for his brainy reputation and signature appearance."
Pentcho Valev
-
EINSTEINIANS WILL UNMASK EINSTEIN
In Appendix 3 in his "Relativity" Einstein starts from the time dilation factor
1/gamma = (1-v^2/c^2)^(1/2)
and eventually deduces the frequency shift factor
1+V/c^2
where V is the gravitational potential. In the process Einstein replaces the time dilation factor 1/gamma with its Taylor approximation
1-v^2/2c^2
and for almost 100 years Einsteinians have been absolutely sure that this replacement can only be due to Einstein's genial intuition and sense of harmony. However lately Einsteinians with powerful intellects have been haunted by a difficult question: Why should the approximation 1-v^2/2c^2 be more suitable than the exact quantity 1/gamma? The inquiry is going to turn into a panic since the frequency shift factor 1+V/c^2 can be rigorously deduced from the principle of variability of the speed of light and this alternative deduction involves no suspicious approximations at all:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm :
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c^2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
Einsteinians love Einstein passionately but, on the other hand, their honest hearts would not tolerate any trickery. As soon as they manage to understand why Einstein hid the obviously correct deduction
VARIABLE SPEED OF LIGHT -> FREQUENCY SHIFT
and replaced it with the trumped-up deduction
TIME DILATION -> FREQUENCY SHIFT
they will unmask him. There can be no doubt about that.
Pentcho Valev
-
DANGEROUS BUSINESS IN EINSTEIN'S CRIMINAL CULT
Classically, Einstein's criminal cult extracted their billions from miracles deduced from Einstein's false principle of constancy of the speed of light. However a few years ago Einsteinians realized in horror that taxpayers were not excited anymore about a twin that sees his brother's clock running slow but then returns and proves younger etc. That was the end of the constant speed of light affair and a natural beginning of the variable speed of light affair.
The new business is dangerous for two reasons: first, variable speed of light could wipe out Einstein's criminal cult altogether; second, variable speed of light per se is unable to produce miracles and therefore excitement among taxpayers is by no means guaranteed. So new business plans involve the following tasks. First, the meaning of "variable" should be confused: the attention should shift from "depending on the speed of the light source" to something different, e.g. "faster in the past, slower now". Second, the variability of the speed of light should be served in fantastically small portions, so fantastically small that excitement is unavoidably restored and, what is even more important, Einstein's theory remains essentially correct:
http://www.discover.com/issues/sep-04/features/testing-the-limits/?page=1
"Testing the Limit of Einstein’s Theories....IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT CONSTANT?....If you compare a lot of high-energy photons with a lot of relatively low-energy ones, you should find that on average, after a billion-year race, the high-energy ones reach GLAST’s detector sooner—by about a millisecond. He and other quantum gravity theorists are pretty excited by that possibility, which just goes to show what they’re up against."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
Dear Pentcho Valev. Dear, dear me. Is preaching appropriate behaviour for a scientist? Do you feel your use of emotive terminology somehow promotes your argument, strengthens your thesis? Are you blissfully unaware that phrases such as 'Einstein's criminal cult' say more about the writer than the object of his displeasure.
My grasp of physics is poor. My understanding of human nature is, however, excellent. That alone allows me to reject your claims as unfounded.
-
I personally think that Pentcho Valev is a 90 year-old russian who is angry that Einstein got to the theory of Relativity first.
But, thats just my opinion, and you may ignore it as you wish.
-
It makes more sense than almost anything else in this thread.
-
EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY: VIOLATIONS AND AXIOMS
Any Einsteinian would tell you violations of the theory entail reconsideration of the axioms: since Einstein's deductions are rigorous, false conclusions would imply false axioms. On the other hand, any breathtaking development of Einstein's relativity can only be triggered by violations and Einsteinians do wish to see that development - the present stalemate is disturbing even for them. The dilemma has an elegant solution: there are numerous violations indeed so the breathtaking development is imminent but those violations are tiny, so tiny that reconsideration of the axioms is not necessary:
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/tips/page/normal/4519.html :
"Alan Kostelecky, Distinguished Professor of Physics at Indiana University Bloomington, has been elected a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science "for seminal contributions to relativity and spacetime symmetries, and for the development of a profound and comprehensive theoretical framework for relativity violations," according to a statement from AAAS....he realized that tiny violations of Einstein's relativity could be an experimental signal of the long-sought underlying theory unifying all known forces and particles....Kostelecky's theory has inspired many searches for relativity violations around the world, and more are being performed..... "The ongoing search for relativity violations is an impressive interdisciplinary effort," Kostelecky said."
Einsteinians reassure themselves in the following way. Since the violations are tiny, axioms are just a little false and therefore virtually true. The reassurance is quite explicit sometimes:
http://www.discover.com/issues/sep-04/features/testing-the-limits/?page=1
"Testing the Limit of Einstein’s Theories....IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT CONSTANT?....If you compare a lot of high-energy photons with a lot of relatively low-energy ones, you should find that on average, after a billion-year race, the high-energy ones reach GLAST’s detector sooner—by about a millisecond. He and other quantum gravity theorists are pretty excited by that possibility, which just goes to show what they’re up against."
Einsteinians know Einstein would disagree about "little falsehood". Once he said: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." However the solution Einsteinians have found is both elegant and all-embracing: Violations are tiny, axioms are just a little false, Einstein is just a little wrong.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
http://www.discover.com/issues/sep-04/features/testing-the-limits/?page=1
"Testing the Limit of Einstein’s Theories....IS THE SPEED OF LIGHT CONSTANT?....If you compare a lot of high-energy photons with a lot of relatively low-energy ones, you should find that on average, after a billion-year race, the high-energy ones reach GLAST’s detector sooner—by about a millisecond. He and other quantum gravity theorists are pretty excited by that possibility, which just goes to show what they’re up against."
If photons have a slight, non zero rest mass, the speed of light would depend slightly on its frequency; nothing paradoxical would happen.
Einsteinians know Einstein would disagree about "little falsehood". Once he said: "If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity is false." However the solution Einsteinians have found is both elegant and all-embracing: Violations are tiny, axioms are just a little false, Einstein is just a little wrong.
Only if the speed of light is equivalent to "the maximum speed of signal propagation", but this is not necessary. If the speed of light would actually be slightly less than that maximum speed, nothing would happen at the present level of experimental precision, and nothing would happen in the theory, because the value of c would be replaced with the very similar value of this maximum speed (which would be, in that case, the limit of light's speed for infinite frequency).
-
EINSTEINIANS RETURN TO NEWTON
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9910/9910325.pdf
Gravitation Without Curved Space-time
Kris Krogh
p.12: "The gravitational frequency shift in Einstein’s 1911 variable-speed-of-light theory was v=v0(1+phi/c^2) which agrees with Eq. (13) to the first order. But there was no effect on lambda, or the dimensions of measuring rods, corresponding to Eq. (14). Consequently, the speed of light in a gravitational potential was c=c0(1+phi/c^2)."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
BAD NEWS FOR EINSTEIN'S CRIMINALS
I have the impression that only the fiercest zombies are still defending Einstein's idiocies. Other members of Einstein's criminal cult are mercilessly removing Einstein's name from their websites while looking for another money-spinner. Bad news comes from everywhere:
http://www.amazon.com/Einsteins-Relativity-Theory-Correct-Paradoxical/dp/1425104819
AMAZON: Einstein's Relativity Theory: Correct, Paradoxical & Wrong (Paperback) by Lyubomir T. Gruyitch. "It accepts severely restrictive, physically unacceptable in general, assumptions that Einstein lifted up to the untouchable postulates. Consequently, his relativity theory and its developments represent a singular case valid only when the assumptions hold, rather than a general relativity theory. They are physically valid only if the Lorentz transformations are physically applicable, which does not happen even for simple systems used in Einstein's relativity theory as illustrative ones."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
THE FORGOTTEN FACET OF EINSTEIN'S THEORY
In 1964 Einsteinians discovered that Einstein's inconsistency, like any other inconsistency, is based on two incompatible principles: the principle of invariability of the speed of light and the principle of variability of the speed of light. They called the discovery "a previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory" and made use of it in the sense of extracting money from it:
http://www.blazelabs.com/f-g-gcont.asp :
"The first confirmation of a long range variation in the speed of light travelling in space came in 1964. Irwin Shapiro, it seems, was the first to make use of a previously forgotten facet of general relativity theory -- that the speed of light is reduced when it passes through a gravitational field. He had proposed an observational test to check his prediction: bounce radar beams off the surface of Venus and Mercury, and measure the round trip travel time. When the Earth, Sun, and Venus are most favorably aligned, Shapiro showed that the expected time delay, due to the presence of the Sun, of a radar signal traveling from the Earth to Venus and back, would be about 200 microseconds more than it would if the sun was not present. Later on, using the MIT Haystack radar antenna, the experiment was repeated, matching Shapiro's predicted amount of time delay. The experiments have been repeated many times since, with increasing accuracy. This experiment had for the first time shown that the constants like c and G, assumed constants in Einstein's SR theory suffered local (or regional) in the proximity of massive bodies like the sun. Faced with this evidence, Einstein stated: "In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position..."
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
NEWTON WRONG IN EINSTEIN'S WORLD
J. Mulligan, INTRODUCTORY COLLEGE PHYSICS, McGraw-Hill, 1985, pp.631-632:
"Sir Isaac Newton had proposed a particle theory of light which explained the refraction of light by the difference in the forces exerted on the particles by the two media, the more dense medium exerting a larger force and causing light to move more rapidly. A measurement of the speed of light in water, made by Foucault in 1850, clearly showed that light has a lower speed in water than in air, and that Newton's theory must therefore be wrong."
If Newton's theory is wrong the more dense medium cannot cause light to move more rapidly (if it can Newton's theory is right). The educator should have stated clearly: Newton wrong means the speed of light is constant (does not vary with position) in either medium, only at the boundary it suddenly changes. However the educator knows Newton is right. Even Einstein knew Newton was right:
http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae13.cfm
"So, it is absolutely true that the speed of light is _not_ constant in a gravitational field [which, by the equivalence principle, applies as well to accelerating (non-inertial) frames of reference]. If this were not so, there would be no bending of light by the gravitational field of stars. One can do a simple Huyghens reconstruction of a wave front, taking into account the different speed of advance of the wavefront at different distances from the star (variation of speed of light), to derive the deflection of the light by the star.
Indeed, this is exactly how Einstein did the calculation in:
"On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light," Annalen der Physik, 35, 1911.
which predated the full formal development of general relativity by about four years. This paper is widely available in English. You can find a copy beginning on page 99 of the Dover book "The Principle of Relativity." You will find in section 3 of that paper, Einstein's derivation of the (variable) speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is,
c' = c0 ( 1 + V / c2 )
where V is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured."
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/speed_of_light.html
"Einstein went on to discover a more general theory of relativity which explained gravity in terms of curved spacetime, and he talked about the speed of light changing in this new theory. In the 1920 book "Relativity: the special and general theory" he wrote: . . . according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity [. . .] cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Since Einstein talks of velocity (a vector quantity: speed with direction) rather than speed alone, it is not clear that he meant the speed will change, but the reference to special relativity suggests that he did mean so."
As for the fact that light has a lower speed in water than in air, it is irrelevant. As the photon enters the more dense medium (water), its INITIAL speed is higher than the speed it had in the less dense medium (air) before the acceleration. So far Newton is right. If Newton thought this initial high speed in the more dense medium remained constant all along then he was mistaken but the mistake is immaterial. His theory of refraction based on the concept of variable speed of light remains correct.
Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com
-
I CANT BELIEVE THIS TOPIC IS STILL RUNNING
-
ME too!! Me son Loved Albert! Very interesting fellow and ideas!
-
I generally don't bother to come in and contradict the loonies (trolls) who post rubbish like Pentcho Valev (and certain other notably loquacious contributors to this site) does. There are too many good and genuine questions that it is worthwhile trying to answer. Looking at his writings it seems that he copies them from one science notice board to another because some of the just don't answer any comments that others make. My experience with more than ten years involvement in discussion pages is generally to ignore the loonies because it is easy to tell them as Ophiolite wisely says.
-
SO far none of the post any questions on second law of thermodynamics.
What exactly does it state?
What is its form in an infinite space?
Is it possible in principle to create a closed system?
What is meant ever increasing surface area of Universe?
What is meant Information Entorpy?
What is the difference between Gravity and Gravitational?
What is Information?
-
The speed of light in a vacuum is constant. Is this statement true? Yes in the way, the statement is phrased. ‘Speed’ is made up of two components distance and time, both of which Relativity tells us are variable in length (that is, both the meter and second are variable in length). If ‘time were a constant’ (which it is not) then the speed of light would be variable.
This begs the question why does light have a very fast but finite speed. We know that a gravity well does affect light. If ‘time were a constant’ then it would slow the speed of light down but as time is variable, the speed of light remains constant and time dilates.
Everywhere within the universe there is a ‘gravitational field’ therefore time is being dilated everywhere. Hypothetically, if you remove the gravitational field then a photon can travel at it’s natural speed which is instantaneous.
I could elaborate on this but then it would be new physics.
See Time 1 http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=39214.0;topicseen
Time 2 http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=39218.0
Gravity and time http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=39216.0
-
Well actually your concepts are good.BUT Rudolph's law is not meaning less.Rudolph was the first person to introduce the concept of entropy on the basis of which new laws of thermodynamics have been based.Rudolph gave a concept that removed the contradiction that was thought to have been ex-sisting between carnot's engine and laws of conservation of energy.As far as Einstein is concerned, speed of light should be constant.None of the two scientists destroyed Physics.