Experts doubt Einstein..... but Einstein Dingleberries still worship him
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum Gravity 398.0: USA Proves Flexagons Related to Probable Causation/Influence (PI)
Next: The Necessity of an experiment (classical electrodynamics) that should have been done 100 years ago
From: mpc755 on 2 Jun 2010 21:28 On Jun 2, 7:44 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 02/06/2010 23:17, mpc755 wrote: > > > > > On Jun 2, 6:05 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax<dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> > > wrote: > >> On 02/06/2010 22:38, Androcles wrote: > > >>> "Dirk Bruere at NeoPax"<dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > >>>news:86ns65Fje9U5(a)mid.individual.net... > >>> | On 02/06/2010 21:07, blackhead wrote: > >>> |> On 2 June, 06:05, PD<thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>> |>> On Jun 1, 10:59 pm, "Me, ...again!"<arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: > >>> |>> > >>> |>> > >>> |>> > >>> |>> > >>> |>> > >>> |>>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, Peter Webb wrote: > >>> |>>>> I gather from the context that you believe that Einstein's Special > >>> and > >>> |>>>> General Theory of Relativity are wrong. > >>> |>> > >>> |>>>> What do you think of Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric > >>> effect > >>> |>>>> (which was instrumental in thedevelopment of Quantum Mechanics, and > >>> for which > >>> |>>>> he earned a Nobel prize), and Einstein's modelling of Brownian motion > >>> (which > >>> |>>>> virtually created the whole field of statistical mechanics) ? > >>> |>> > >>> |>>>> Was he wrong about them as well? > >>> |>> > >>> |>>> Was Einstein right or wrong? > >>> |>> > >>> |>>> What we have are two schools of thought: i) Einstein did something, > >>> vs. > >>> |>>> ii) a bunch of experts/skeptics who think Einstein made a lot of > >>> noise, > >>> |>>> more heat than light, and fooled a lot of people. > >>> |>> > >>> |>> I really don't care much for schools of thought. After all, there is > >>> |>> still a substantial school of thought that the earth is 6600 years > >>> |>> old, but that doesn't mean its existence automatically earns it any > >>> |>> credibility. > >>> |>> > >>> |>> I'm much more interested in understanding WHY those people in the anti- > >>> |>> Einstein school of thought feel that way. > >>> |>> Some candidate ideas: > >>> |>> - The theory is wrong, because it makes no sense to these people, and > >>> |>> these people firmly believe that unless a theory makes sense, it > >>> |>> cannot possibly be considered right. > >>> |>> - The theory is wrong, though it is right by the metrics by which > >>> |>> science judges theories. But this points to the fundamental problem > >>> |>> with how science is done, and this theory being wrong is just a > >>> |>> symptom of that problem. > >>> |>> - The theory is probably right, but the credit is wrongly given to > >>> |>> Einstein, as it properly belongs to other people. > >>> |>> - The theory's correctness is completely uncertain at this point, and > >>> |>> the issue is that scientists insist that it must be accepted as right. > >>> |>> - Even if the theory is right, voice needs to be given to the contrary > >>> |>> proposal with equal weight, for the sake of maintaining debate. > >>> |>> > >>> |>> Which of these represents your position?- Hide quoted text - > >>> |>> > >>> |>> - Show quoted text - > >>> |> > >>> |> Special Relativity was controversial when it first came out, although > >>> |> it was accepted by *leading* physicists such a Plank according to: > >>> |> > >>> |> The Comparative reception of relativity By Thomas F. Glick. > >>> |> > >>> |> The people who criticize it nowadays possess the same mindset as those > >>> |> of 100 years ago, because they're studying it from the original > >>> |> sources. It's similar to trying to study calculus by looking at the > >>> |> original papers of Lebniz or Newton; or Lagrangian mechanics by > >>> |> studying his Mécanique analytique. The subject has evolved enormously > >>> |> over the intervening years and there is no need to get lost in the > >>> |> confusion of the past when today, people have cut away the brambles to > >>> |> create a clear path. Yet, still these people first read the original > >>> |> papers of Eisntein, Lorentz, Michleson Morely and try to seek out > >>> |> something wrong with the original conclusions. > >>> |> > >>> |> Speaking for myself, I still find the predictions of SR to be > >>> |> outrageous such as relativity of simultaneity, time dilation, Lorentz > >>> |> contraction, equivalence of mass and energy, relativistic mass etc. > >>> |> Yet it's backed up by modern experimental evidence and so it would be > >>> |> foolish of me to reject it at first sight without first trying to > >>> |> study it from a modern view point and then criticizing it. I still > >>> |> have a long way to go, but the more I study it, the more I'm amazed by > >>> |> its power. > >>> |> > >>> |> Larry > >>> | > >>> | c = const is all that is needed. > >>> | The maths follows. > > >>> Assertion carries no weight. > >>> c' = c+v > > >> Not if the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames > > >> -- > >> Dirk > > >>http://www.transcendence.me.uk/-Transcendence UKhttp://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe-Occult Talk Show > > > The speed of light is measured to be 'c' in all inertial frames. > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, > > ... disregarding the causes which condition its state" > > - Albert Einstein > > > The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the > > matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the > > aether's state of displacement. > > > In Einstein's train gedanken the state of the aether is determined by > > its connections with the Earth. This means the aether is more at rest > > with respect to the embankment than it is the train. > > > The Observers on the train synchronize three clocks at M'. One > > Observer walks a clock to A' and the other walks a clock to B'. When > > the Observer walks the clock to A' the clock is being walked with the > > 'flow' of aether and ticks faster. The clock walked to B' is being > > walked against the 'flow' of aether and ticks slower. > > > Lightning strikes occur at A/A' and B/B' and arrive at the Observer at > > M on the embankment simultaneously. > > > When the lightning strikes occur on the train the clocks at A', M', > > and B' read 12:00:03, 12:00:02, and 12:00:01, respectively. > > > The light from B' reaches the Observer at M' prior to the light from > > A'. When the Observers on the train get back together they conclude > > the lightning strike at B/B' occurred prior to the lightning strike at > > A/A' and the light traveled at 'c'. > > If the equations are the same the "what REALLY happens" is just > philosophy or religion. > Then you will never understand the physics of nature. With aether, the physics of nature are easily understood. Aether and matter are different states of the same material. The material is mæther. Mæther has mass. Aether and matter have mass. Aether is uncompressed mæther and matter is compressed mæther. Aether is displaced by matter. The aether is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. The 'displacing back' is the pressure exerted by the aether. Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places, ... disregarding the causes which condition its state" - Albert Einstein The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the aether's state of displacement. A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave. The C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. The aether wave enters and exits multiple slits. The aether wave creates interference upon exiting the slits which alters the direction the C-60 molecule travels. Detecting the C-60 molecule causes decoherence of the aether wave and there is not interference. 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. EINSTEIN' http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass diminishes by L/c2." The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether and matter is energy. Mass does not convert to energy. Matter converts to aether. As the mæther transitions from matter to aether it increases in volume. The physical effect the increase in volume has on the neighboring matter and aether is energy. The physical effect of mæther decompressing is energy. Mass is conserved. The rate at which an atomic clock 'ticks' is based upon the aether pressure in which it exists. In terms of motion, the speed of a GPS satellite with respect to the aether causes it to displace more aether and for that aether to exert more pressure on the clock in the GPS satellite than the aether pressure associated with a clock at rest with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite clock to "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure on the GPS satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth "causing the GPS clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated with the speed at which the GPS satellite moves with respect to the aether and the aether pressure associated with the aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS satellites [to] tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the ground." (quoted text from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS). In Einstein's train gedanken the state of the aether is determined by its connections with the Earth. This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment than it is the train. The Observers on the train synchronize three clocks at M'. One Observer walks a clock to A' and the other walks a clock to B'. When the Observer walks the clock to A' the clock is being walked with the 'flow' of aether and ticks faster. The clock walked to B' is being walked against the 'flow' of aether and ticks slower. Lightning strikes occur at A/A' and B/B' and arrive at the Observer at M on the embankment simultaneously. When the lightning strikes occur on the train the clocks at A', M', and B' read 12:00:03, 12:00:02, and 12:00:01, respectively. The light from B' reaches the Observer at M' prior to the light from A'. When the Observers on the train get back together they conclude the lightning strike at B/B' occurred prior to the lightning strike at A/A' and the light traveled at 'c'.
From: mpc755 on 2 Jun 2010 21:34 On Jun 2, 9:24 pm, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, mpc755 wrote: > > On Jun 2, 3:16 pm, "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, 2 Jun 2010, mpc755 wrote: > >>> On Jun 1, 6:59 am, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...(a)gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> On 01/06/2010 09:30, hanson wrote: > > >>>>> "Einstein was right?" yields 148,000 Google hits, posted by > > >>>> Aether = quantum vacuum. > >>>> Plus, if the equations governing the aether are the same as STR and GTR, > >>>> what's the point? Do any aether theories predict neutron star slow-down > >>>> and time dilation in a gravitational field to the same accuracy? > > >>>> -- > >>>> Dirk > > >>>>http://www.transcendence.me.uk/-TranscendenceUK > >>>>http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe-OccultTalk Show > > >>> With aether, the physics of nature are easily understood. > > >>> Aether and matter are different states of the same material. > >>> The material is mæther. > >>> Mæther has mass. > >>> Aether and matter have mass. > >>> Aether is uncompressed mæther and matter is compressed mæther. > >>> Aether is displaced by matter. > >>> The aether is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. > >>> The 'displacing back' is the pressure exerted by the aether. > >>> Gravity is pressure exerted by displaced aether towards matter. > > >>> "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > >>> with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring > >>> places, ...disregarding the causes which condition its state" - Albert > >>> Einstein > > >>> The state of the aether as determined by its connections with the > >>> matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the > >>> aether's state of displacement. > > >>> A moving C-60 molecule has an associated aether displacement wave. The > >>> C-60 molecule enters and exits a single slit. The aether wave enters > >>> and exits multiple slits. The aether wave creates interference upon > >>> exiting the slits which alters the direction the C-60 molecule > >>> travels. Detecting the C-60 molecule causes decoherence of the aether > >>> wave and there is not interference. > > >>> 'DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT? By A. > >>> EINSTEIN' > >>>http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/e_mc2.pdf > > >>> "If a body gives off the energy L in the form of radiation, its mass > >>> diminishes by L/c2." > > >>> The mass of the body does diminish, but the matter which no longer > >>> exists as part of the body has not vanished. It still exists, as > >>> aether. As the matter transitions to aether it expands in three > >>> dimensions. The effect this transition has on the surrounding aether > >>> and matter is energy. > > >>> Mass does not convert to energy. Matter converts to aether. As the > >>> mæther transitions from matter to aether it increases in volume. The > >>> physical effect the increase in volume has on the neighboring matter > >>> and aether is energy. > > >>> The physical effect of mæther decompressing is energy. > > >>> Mass is conserved. > > >>> The rate at which an atomic clock 'ticks' is based upon the aether > >>> pressure in which it exists. In terms of motion, the speed of a GPS > >>> satellite with respect to the aether causes it to displace more aether > >>> and for that aether to exert more pressure on the clock in the GPS > >>> satellite than the aether pressure associated with a clock at rest > >>> with respect to the Earth. This causes the GPS satellite clock to > >>> "result in a delay of about 7 ìs/day". The aether pressure associated > >>> with the aether displaced by the Earth exerts less pressure on the GPS > >>> satellite than a similar clock at rest on the Earth "causing the GPS > >>> clocks to appear faster by about 45 ìs/day". The aether pressure > >>> associated with the speed at which the GPS satellite moves with > >>> respect to the aether and the aether pressure associated with the > >>> aether displaced by the Earth causes "clocks on the GPS satellites > >>> [to] tick approximately 38 ìs/day faster than clocks on the ground." > >>> (quoted text fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_relativity_on_GPS). > > >> Thanks for bringing this to the NGs. > > > No prob. You heard it here first. > > You're right, but none of it is my specialization. Got my PhD in biology. > Got my grants in biomedical research. Now, retired. Reading a lot of > history for fun. It doesn't have to be your specialization in order to understand aether and matter are different states of the same material. Once you understand aether and matter are different states of the same material much of what is not understood correctly in physics today is easily understood. Not to repeat the whole post here, but just the simple fact 'mainstream' physics thinks mass coverts to energy is evidence of how 'mainstream' physics does not understand the physics of nature. Matter converts to aether. Matter expands in three dimensions as it transitions. The physical effects of the expansion is energy. Gravity, Double Slit Experiments, E=mc^2, Einstein's train gedanken are all easily understood once you realize aether and matter are different states of the same material and aether is displaced by matter.
From: Peter Webb on 2 Jun 2010 23:16 >> I think it will be a very long time before a space ship goes out at high >> speed and comes back with the passenger being younger than his brother >> left behind. Far from being a very long time, this experiment has already been done many times using aircraft. And yes, the twin clock does return younger than the stay-at-home clock, by exactly the amount predicted by relativity. That's one of the many, many experimental tests that Relativity has been subjected to, and all of which it has passed. That's why physicists believe it to be correct, because its predictions are borne out by physical experiment.
From: Peter Webb on 2 Jun 2010 23:20 "train" <gehan.ameresekere(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:1dfb7710-9c79-4d74-b0a9-6f263afe872a(a)y6g2000pra.googlegroups.com... On Jun 2, 7:22 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "Me, ...again!" <arthu...(a)mv.com> wrote in message > > news:Pine.BSF.4.61.1006020714190.11116(a)osmium.mv.net... > > > > > I wrote a long extended response to "PD" and I'll refer you to that. > > > It has been decades since I studied these phenomena and read/learned > > from > > classes and books. I switched to biology long ago and can speak with > > authority in the field I specialized in, membrane biophysics. > > > I do not mean to castigate Einstein, but rather to recognize that a lot > > of > > very bright people who know a lot more than I do about the subject are > > trying to say that Einstein is getting more credit and attention than he > > deserves. > > Who? > > Some other nutter? > > What public figure or scientist in the last 50 years has said that > Einstein > is getting more credit than he deserves for his contribution to physics? > > And do you think that Einstein gets enough credit for his explanation of > (say) the photo-electric effect? I bet not one person in 100 would know > that > this paper oh is was instrumental in the development of quantum mechanics. > Nobody gives him any credit for that. And I bet that not one person in a > thousand would be aware that his explanation of Brownian motion created > the > field of statistical mechanics. > > He seems to get a lot less credit for these other things than he deserves, > wouldn't you agree? AE won the Nobel Prize for He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics "for his services to Theoretical Physics, and especially for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect."[3] - Wikipedia Actually I could say that it does not matter if he is right or wrong or was right or wrong or whatever, His theory is ingrained into the fabric of modern day science, it is a tradition and a doctrine, a change to which will require millions of years of scientific evolution. ___________________________ The question was whether he received too much credit for those discoveries. Given that almost nobody outside the physics community knows about his huge contributions to QM, statistical mechanics and other parts of physics I think the answer is pretty obviously "no". Einstein clearly receives too little credit for the work he did outside of Relativity theory. You can help in this. Whenever you discuss Einstein's contributions to Relativity theory, it would be helpful if you also pointed out his contributions to other parts of physics. Credit where credit is due, after all.
From: mpc755 on 2 Jun 2010 23:22
On Jun 2, 11:16 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> I think it will be a very long time before a space ship goes out at high > >> speed and comes back with the passenger being younger than his brother > >> left behind. > > Far from being a very long time, this experiment has already been done many > times using aircraft. And yes, the twin clock does return younger than the > stay-at-home clock, by exactly the amount predicted by relativity. > > That's one of the many, many experimental tests that Relativity has been > subjected to, and all of which it has passed. That's why physicists believe > it to be correct, because its predictions are borne out by physical > experiment. You are mistaking atomic clocks for brothers. An atomic clock ticks based upon the aether pressure in which it exists. One brother at zero G's and the other on the Earth is a completely different situation. Comparing atomic clocks to brother's is more of the ridiculous nonsense associated with 'mainstream' physics. There is a space ship orbiting the Earth very quickly. The astronaut determines where the space ship and the Earth are relative to the Sun. The astronaut continually checks where the space ship and the Earth are relative to the Sun. When the space ship and the Earth are in the closest possible location relative to the Sun based upon the distant stars the astronaut determines one year has passed. If the atomic clock on the space ship does not agree with this conclusion then the atomic clock did not 'tick' at the correct rate. |