Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #566561 > unrolled thread

Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-11 11:44 -0800
    Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2021-11-11 17:31 -0800
      Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-11-12 14:24 -0800
        Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics Athel Cornish-Bowden <acornish@imm.cnrs.fr> - 2021-11-13 17:50 +0100
          Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2021-11-13 11:49 -0800
    Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics Coke Alva <uoi@oui.iu> - 2021-11-12 15:10 +0000
    Re: Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2021-11-12 09:57 -0800

#566561 — Einstein: the Father of Post-Truth Physics

In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been universally taught ever since (post-truth science):

The New York Times, April 19, 1921: "The special relativity arose from the question of whether light had an invariable velocity in free space, he [Einstein] said. The velocity of light could only be measured relative to a body or a co-ordinate system. He sketched a co-ordinate system K to which light had a velocity C. Whether the system was in motion or not was the fundamental principle. This has been developed through the researches of Maxwell and Lorentz, the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light having been based on many of their experiments. But did it hold for only one system? he asked. He gave the example of a street and a vehicle moving on that street. If the velocity of light was C for the street was it also C for the vehicle? If a second co-ordinate system K was introduced, moving with the velocity V, did light have the velocity of C here? When the light traveled the system moved with it, so it would appear that light moved slower and the principle apparently did not hold. Many famous experiments had been made on this point. Michelson showed that relative to the moving co-ordinate system K1, the light traveled with the same velocity as relative to K, which is contrary to the above observation. How could this be reconciled? Professor Einstein asked." https://ebay.com/itm/ALBERT-EINSTEIN-Lecture-on-SPEED-OF-LIGHT-Time-1st-Visit-to-US-1921-Newspaper/373400655156

Partial honesty in the Einstein cult. Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's collaborator, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light and, accordingly, incompatible with the constant speed of light:

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#566585

On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 11:44:19 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been universally taught ever since (post-truth science): 
> 
> The New York Times, April 19, 1921: "The special relativity arose from the question of whether light had an invariable velocity in free space, he [Einstein] said. The velocity of light could only be measured relative to a body or a co-ordinate system. He sketched a co-ordinate system K to which light had a velocity C. Whether the system was in motion or not was the fundamental principle. This has been developed through the researches of Maxwell and Lorentz, the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light having been based on many of their experiments. But did it hold for only one system? he asked. He gave the example of a street and a vehicle moving on that street. If the velocity of light was C for the street was it also C for the vehicle? If a second co-ordinate system K was introduced, moving with the velocity V, did light have the velocity of C here? When the light traveled the system moved with it, so it would appear that light moved slower and the principle apparently did not hold. Many famous experiments had been made on this point. Michelson showed that relative to the moving co-ordinate system K1, the light traveled with the same velocity as relative to K, which is contrary to the above observation. How could this be reconciled? Professor Einstein asked." https://ebay.com/itm/ALBERT-EINSTEIN-Lecture-on-SPEED-OF-LIGHT-Time-1st-Visit-to-US-1921-Newspaper/373400655156 
> 
> Partial honesty in the Einstein cult. Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's collaborator, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light and, accordingly, incompatible with the constant speed of light: 
> 
> "Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768 
> 
> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev 
> 
> Pentcho Valev

The moron is back.

--
Jan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#566649

JanPB wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 11:44:19 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> > In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been universally taught ever since (post-truth science):
> >
> 
> >
> > Partial honesty in the Einstein cult. Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's collaborator, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light and, accordingly, incompatible with the constant speed of light:
> >
> 
> >
> > See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >
> > Pentcho Valev
> 
> The moron is back.

who are you talking about? dey are all over the place!!!!


they are crawling out of the wood work!





> 
> --
> Jan

-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#566670

On 2021-11-12 22:24:15 +0000, The Starmaker said:

> JanPB wrote:
>> 
>> On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 11:44:19 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>>> In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed 
>>> of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the 
>>> experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been 
>>> universally taught ever since (post-truth science):
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> Partial honesty in the Einstein cult. Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's 
>>> collaborator, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting 
>>> lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley 
>>> experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light and, 
>>> accordingly, incompatible with the constant speed of light:
>>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
>>> 
>>> Pentcho Valev
>> 
>> The moron is back.
> 
> who are you talking about? dey are all over the place!!!!

Yes, but this particular one was missing for a while.
> 
> 
> they are crawling out of the wood work!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> --
>> Jan


-- 
Athel -- French and British, living mainly in England until 1987.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#566685

Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:
> 
> On 2021-11-12 22:24:15 +0000, The Starmaker said:
> 
> > JanPB wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thursday, November 11, 2021 at 11:44:19 AM UTC-8, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> >>> In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed
> >>> of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the
> >>> experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been
> >>> universally taught ever since (post-truth science):
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Partial honesty in the Einstein cult. Banesh Hoffmann, Einstein's
> >>> collaborator, admits that, originally ("without recourse to contracting
> >>> lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations"), the Michelson-Morley
> >>> experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light and,
> >>> accordingly, incompatible with the constant speed of light:
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev
> >>>
> >>> Pentcho Valev
> >>
> >> The moron is back.
> >
> > who are you talking about? dey are all over the place!!!!
> 
> Yes, but this particular one was missing for a while.



Missing? He had to come back to get his...fix. Feed his addiction..
shoot up Usenet Blue Magic up his arm. 

He had the Jones.


-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
 to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
 the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#566599

Pentcho Valev wrote:

> In 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment proved Newton's variable speed
> of light. In 1921 Einstein, already a deity, declared that the
> experiment had proved constant speed of light. The blatant lie has been
> universally taught ever since (post-truth science):

of course they use statistics and large errorbars. This is how they push 
the misery right now, in capitalism. That eugenicist inbreed retard, say 
his name, bill gaytes, was reading *How_to_cheat_with_statistics*. The 
capitalism is eating the west through. They are like alone in this 
business,

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#566620

John Norton unwittingly exposes Einsteinians ("later writers") as blatant liars. They use the Michelson-Morley experiment "as support for the light postulate of special relativity", knowing that this experiment is "fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate":

John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

Understandably, John Norton, a high priest in the Einstein cult, is trying to exonerate Einstein. Actually, Einstein devised the Michelson-Morley-experiment hoax in 1921.

More here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web