FORBIDDEN LOGIC IN EINSTEINIANA
in [Logic]
|
Prev: 2010 Federal Taxation With H&R Block Taxcut 4e Pratt Kulsrud Solutions manual
Next: Problem: how can first-order logic be at the same time complete and only semi-decidable?
From: Pentcho Valev on 11 Aug 2010 05:15 Pentcho Valev wrote: > However one is entitled to assume that this "stretching" is just as > silly as the variation of the speed of light with the speed of the > observer and advance the following argument... Mistake: I wrote "speed of light" instead of "wavelength". Here is the corrected text: The formula: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) has always been a nightmare in Einsteiniana. This formula makes the obvious fact "Both the frequency and the speed of light vary with the speed of the observer", a fact consistent with both Maxwell's theory and Newton's emission theory of light (but not with Divine Albert's Divine Special Relativity), too obvious. That is, even in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world, where any idiocy is welcome, the formula might prove dangerous for Einstein's 1905 false light postulate. So Einsteinians fiercely teach that it is the wavelength that varies 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)." Similarly, when confronted with Hubble redshift, Einsteinians fiercely teach that the allegedly EXPANDING universe somehow "stretches" the wavelength and so the constancy of the speed of light is saved. However one is entitled to assume that this "stretching" is just as silly as the variation of the wavelength with the speed of the observer and advance the following argument: PREMISE 1: The frequency of light coming from distant sources decreases proportionally to the distance (Hubble redshift). PREMISE 2: "Stretching" of the wavelength does not occur. CONCLUSION: In our STATIC universe, the speed of light coming from distant sources decreases proportionally to the distance. Pentcho Valev wrote: PREMISE 1: The wavelength of light cannot vary with the speed of the observer. PREMISE 2: (frequency) = (speed of light)/(wavelength) CONCLUSION: The speed of light varies with the speed of the observer, that is, Einstein's 1905 light postulate is false. Pentcho Valev pvalev(a)yahoo.com |