gratifiant > sci.* > sci.physique

Pentcho Valev (17/04/2019, 12h15)
Einstein in conflict with his conscience as he introduces obvious nonsense:

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 ofdespair."

Accurate presentation of Einstein's 1905 nonsensical axiom:

Brian Greene: What does it mean for the speed of light to be constant?

Space and time were vandalized accordingly - to fit the nonsensical constancy - and physics died (became insane):

"Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime."

Physicists know the truth - there are fears and hesitations but a paradigm shift is impending and unavoidable:

"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."

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light," Joao Magueijo, a cosmologist at Imperial College London and pioneer of the theory of variable light speed, told Motherboard. "So we [Joao Magueijo and Niayesh Afshordi] had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much."

Joao Magueijo, Niayesh Afshordi, Stephon Alexander: "So we have broken fundamentally this Lorentz invariance which equates space and time [...] It's the other postulate of relativity, that of constancy of c, that has to give way..."

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev (18/04/2019, 00h03)
The formula

(frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength)

implies that, if the speed of light is invariable, as Einstein postulated in 1905,

any frequency shift entails a wavelength shift.

The implication is obviously false, which means that Einstein's 1905 postulate is false as well:

"Thus, the moving observer sees a wave possessing the same wavelength [...]but a different frequency [...] to that seen by the stationary observer."

"By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, oncemore, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiveris somewhat higher than the frequency with which the pulses are sent out. This time, the distances between subsequent pulses are not affected, but still there is a frequency shift."

"Let's say you, the observer, now move toward the source with velocity Vo. You encounter more waves per unit time than you did before. Relative to you, the waves travel at a higher speed: V' = V+Vo. The frequency of the waves you detect is higher, and is given by: f' = V'/λ = (V+Vo)/λ."

"Vo is the velocity of an observer moving towards the source. This velocityis 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 notalter the wavelength. The increase in frequency is a result of the observer encountering more wavelengths in a given time."

The fundamental axiom of today's physics

"The speed of light is invariable"

is false, even nonsensical. In future physics, it will be replaced with thecorrect axiom

"The wavelength of light is invariable".

See more here:

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev (18/04/2019, 10h19)
Post-truth (post-sanity) science: High priests in Einstein cult repudiate Einstein's spacetime, declare that it doesn't exist, but worship the underlying premise, Einstein's false constant-speed-of-light postulate, and LIGO'sripples in spacetime:

Nima Arkani-Hamed (06:09): "Almost all of us believe that spacetime doesn'treally exist, spacetime is doomed and has to be replaced..."

"And by making the clock's tick relative - what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another - Einstein's theory of special relativity not only destroyed any notion of absolute time but made time equivalent to a dimension in space: the future is already out there waiting for us; we just can't see it until we get there. This view is a logical andmetaphysical dead end, says Smolin."

"Was Einstein wrong? At least in his understanding of time, Smolin argues, the great theorist of relativity was dead wrong. What is worse, by firmly enshrining his error in scientific orthodoxy, Einstein trapped his successors in insoluble dilemmas..."

Nobel Laureate David Gross observed, "Everyone in string theory is convinced...that spacetime is doomed. But we don't know what it's replaced by."

What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... [...] The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..."

"Rethinking Einstein: The end of space-time. [...] Horava, who is at the University of California, Berkeley, wants to rip this fabric apart and set time and space free from one another in order to come up with a unified theory that reconciles the disparate worlds of quantum mechanics and gravity - one the most pressing challenges to modern physics."

"We've known for decades that space-time is doomed," says Arkani-Hamed. "Weknow it is not there in the next version of physics."

So spacetime "is not there in the next version of physics" but LIGO's ripples in spacetime are there, like the grin of the Cheshire cat:



Pentcho Valev
Discussions similaires