EINSTEINIANA: THE FUNDAMENTAL NIGHTMARE
in [Math]
|
Prev: why isnt sqrt(x^2 + y^2) a polynomial?
Next: infinity on the small scale between two integers and infinity on the large scale #628 Correcting Math
From: Pentcho Valev on 4 Jul 2010 01:15 (FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH) If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter, then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible) implications: 1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary physics as a whole. 2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover, there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed of the observer: http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html "Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide. The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased." http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)." Pentcho Valev pvalev(a)yahoo.com
From: Neon on 4 Jul 2010 03:37 On 4 July, 06:15, Pentcho Valev <pva...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > (FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH) > > If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a > substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a > gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter, > then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is > experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible) > implications: > > 1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with > the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a > prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary > physics as a whole. > > 2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with > the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where > the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover, > there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed > of the observer: > > http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html > "Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide. > The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant > frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the > ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him > to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased." > > http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/ind... > John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer > were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now > pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would > mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to > have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE > BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)." Would time pass faster the brighter it became? Or seem to become more apparent the brighter it got? The more particle or wave activity the faster the combustion, the lower the activity the longer time would appear to an outside observer
From: Jacko on 4 Jul 2010 08:28 Hi Because the light is moving, the same independent of observation (as there may be multiple observers, and so one observation must not be signaled to the other observer), an observer passing toward it, gets crested more often and sees an apparent decrease of the wavelength. In this sense independent of a gravity field the speed of light (c) is invariant (does not appear to change). This is not the same as saying it is constant. It means that c appears to be constant, and any way of measuring c requires knowing c through equipment based upon c for operational spppeds etc., and so ... it has never been proved constant, nor will it ever be. It has been proved invariant. In a gravity field, c is also invariant, is it just that space bubbles out into higher dimensional paths, or does c actually decrease? Think of this one. If light observes itself, passing along side itself, then due to travelling at the speed of light, no time passes, and the light arrives at the same time it leaves! Does light think it exists? But observing itself with a relative speed of zero, it has time, and never moves! We think of light existing, but photons never experience any existential time. We will never see one travelling, we only see the photon after absorbtion. I think photons are just a concept, and do not exist as physical. They are just a means of expressing transfered uncertainty of physical matter. Cheers Jacko
From: Pentcho Valev on 5 Jul 2010 02:26 Einsteiniana's fundamental nightmare can be formulated in the following way: Judging from the frequency shift measured in a gravitational field, the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer in perfect accordance with Newton's emission theory of light (that is, Einstein's 1905 light postulate is false). The nightmare is so horrible that sometimes Einsteinians lose control and expose the fundamental idiocy of Einstein's general relativity: THE FUNDAMENTAL IDIOCY OF EINSTEIN'S GENERAL RELATIVITY: The frequency varies in perfect accordance with Newton's emission theory of light but the speed of light doesn't - it varies faster by a factor of two: http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath115/kmath115.htm "In the general theory of relativity the predicted frequency shift for light in a gravitational field is the same as Einstein had predicted in 1911. However, in the 1915 theory, the amount of deflection which a ray of light is predicted to undergo when passing by a gravitating body is twice as much as he had predicted in 1911." Pentcho Valev wrote: (FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH) If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter, then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible) implications: 1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary physics as a whole. 2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover, there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed of the observer: http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html "Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide. The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased." http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/index.html John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would now pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)." Pentcho Valev pvalev(a)yahoo.com
From: Neon on 5 Jul 2010 09:51
On Jul 5, 7:26 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Einsteiniana's fundamental nightmare can be formulated in the > following way: > > Judging from the frequency shift measured in a gravitational field, > the speed of light varies with the speed of the observer in perfect > accordance with Newton's emission theory of light (that is, Einstein's > 1905 light postulate is false). > > The nightmare is so horrible that sometimes Einsteinians lose control > and expose the fundamental idiocy of Einstein's general relativity: > > THE FUNDAMENTAL IDIOCY OF EINSTEIN'S GENERAL RELATIVITY: The frequency > varies in perfect accordance with Newton's emission theory of light > but the speed of light doesn't - it varies faster by a factor of two: > > http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath115/kmath115.htm > "In the general theory of relativity the predicted frequency shift for > light in a gravitational field is the same as Einstein had predicted > in 1911. However, in the 1915 theory, the amount of deflection which a > ray of light is predicted to undergo when passing by a gravitating > body is twice as much as he had predicted in 1911." > > Pentcho Valev wrote: > > (FREQUENCY) = (SPEED OF LIGHT) / (WAVELENGTH) > > If the observer stands on the surface of a celestial body with a > substantial gravitational field, or if, in the absence of a > gravitational field, the observer accelerates towards the emitter, > then he finds the frequency of coming light INCREASING, and this is > experimentally confirmed. The above formula allows two (incompatible) > implications: > > 1. The wavelength is constant while the speed of light increases with > the frequency. This is fatal for Einstein's relativity and, if a > prophesy made by Einstein in 1954 is taken seriously, for contemporary > physics as a whole. > > 2. The speed of light is constant while the wavelength decreases with > the frequency. This contradicts Einstein's general relativity where > the speed of light in a gravitational field is VARIABLE; moreover, > there can be nothing sillier than a wavelength varying with the speed > of the observer: > > http://sampit.geol.sc.edu/Doppler.html > "Moving observer: A man is standing on the beach, watching the tide. > The waves are washing into the shore and over his feet with a constant > frequency and wavelength. However, if he begins walking out into the > ocean, the waves will begin hitting him more frequently, leading him > to perceive that the wavelength of the waves has decreased." > > http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/big_bang/ind... > John Norton: "Here's a light wave and an observer. If the observer > were to hurry towards the source of the light, the observer would .now > pass wavecrests more frequently than the resting observer. That would > mean that moving observer would find the frequency of the light to > have increased (AND CORRESPONDINGLY FOR THE WAVELENGTH - THE DISTANCE > BETWEEN CRESTS - TO HAVE DECREASED)." > > Pentcho Valev > pva...(a)yahoo.com To make it easy? Could Iwrite one formula on a strip of cardboard and make the other out of plaster or clay? |