gratifiant > sci.* > sci.astrophysique

Pentcho Valev (10/01/2020, 22h07)
Nowadays physicists repudiate Einstein's spacetime, declare that it doesn'texist, but worship the underlying premise, Einstein's nonsensical constant-speed-of-light postulate, and LIGO's gravitational waves (ripples 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..."

Philip Ball: "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 and metaphysical 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:



In the next version of fundamental physics the original malignancy, Einstein's 1905 nonsensical axiom

"The speed of light is constant"

will be replaced with the correct axiom

"For a given emitter, the wavelength of light is constant".

I have developed the idea in a series of tweets here:

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev (11/01/2020, 00h47)
Spacetime is an "immediate consequence" of Einstein's constant-speed-of-light postulate:

"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."

This means that, if the speed of light is variable (it is!), spacetime doesnot exist and neither do gravitational waves (ripples in spacetime). LIGO conspirators just fake them.

The speed of light is OBVIOUSLY variable:

Stationary light source, moving observer (receiver):





"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."

The speed of the light pulses as measured by the source is

c = df

where d is the distance between the pulses and f is the frequency measured by the source. The speed of the pulses as measured by the observer is

c'= df' > c

where f' > f is the frequency measured by the observer.

See more here:

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev (11/01/2020, 13h25)
New Scientist: "Must we topple Einstein to let physics leap forward again?"https://newscientist.com/article/mg24232260-500-must-we-topple-einstein-to-let-physics-leap-forward-again/

New Scientist: "Saving time: Physics killed it. Do we need it back? [...] Einstein landed the fatal blow at the turn of the 20th century."

New Scientist: "Bye bye space-time: is it time to free physics from Einstein's legacy?"

Einstein somehow managed to convince the gullible world that an obvious nonsense - "the speed of light is constant" - is a non-negotiable truth. The nonsense proved to be highly malignant - its metastases permeated and eventually killed the whole field of science called physics:

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

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."

"The speaker Joao Magueijo, is a Reader in Theoretical Physics at Imperial College, London and author of Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation. 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."

"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of containing new quantum gravitational effects." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250

See more here:

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev (11/01/2020, 13h35)
New Scientist: "Must we topple Einstein to let physics leap forward again?"https://newscientist.com/article/mg24232260-500-must-we-topple-einstein-to-let-physics-leap-forward-again/

New Scientist: "Saving time: Physics killed it. Do we need it back? [...] Einstein landed the fatal blow at the turn of the 20th century."

New Scientist: "Bye bye space-time: is it time to free physics from Einstein's legacy?"

Einstein somehow managed to convince the gullible world that an obvious nonsense - "the speed of light is constant" - is a non-negotiable truth. The nonsense proved to be highly malignant - its metastases permeated and eventually killed the whole field of science called physics:

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

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."

"The speaker Joao Magueijo, is a Reader in Theoretical Physics at Imperial College, London and author of Faster Than the Speed of Light: The Story of a Scientific Speculation. 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."

"Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of containing new quantum gravitational effects." Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250

See

Pentcho Valev
Discussions similaires