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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #380405 > unrolled thread

How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano"

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

Contents

  How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-29 01:01 -0700
    Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 11:13 -0700
    Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 01:43 -0700
      Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-30 04:28 -0700
      Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-03-31 02:43 -0700
        Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 11:54 -0700
          Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Bimpy <pimp@pimp.com> - 2016-03-31 19:01 +0000
          Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2016-03-31 22:11 +0200
        Re: How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano" Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-04-04 08:53 -0700

#380405 — How Physicists Get the Name "Bingo the Einsteiniano"

http://backreaction.blogspot.bg/2016/03/hey-bill-nye-please-stop-talking.html 
 Sabine Hossenfelder: "Hey Bill Nye, Please stop talking nonsense about quantum mechanics. (...) Once you can send information faster than the speed of light, you can also send it back in time. If you can send information back in time, you can create inconsistent histories, that is, you can create various different pasts, a problem commonly known as "grandfather paradox:" What happens if you travel back in time and kill your grandpa? Will Marty McFly be born if he doesn't get his mom to dance with his dad? Exactly this problem."

http://motls.blogspot.bg/2016/03/hey-bill-nye-please-stop-talking.html 
 Luboš Motl: "Hey Bill Nye, please stop talking nonsense about quantum mechanics (...) As Einstein figured out in 1905 when he discovered the special theory of relativity, no information can ever propagate faster than the speed of light (in the vacuum) let alone instantaneously. If this were possible, the Lorentz symmetry – the right way to switch to the perspective of a different inertial observer – would allow us to describe the same causation as a sequence of events where the effect has preceded the cause. It's clearly impossible." 

This is much sillier than Bill Nye's insights. In their early education Sabine Hossenfelder and Luboš Motl were forced to repeat wisdoms of this kind until in the end both of them got the name Bingo the Einsteiniano: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX5ajyPr96M 
 Bingo (Chris Landreth, 1998) 

A clear example of the conversion of normal people into thoughtless zombies: Initially Joe Wolfe's students are sure that the speed of light cannot be the same for differently moving observers but in the end all of them get the name Bingo the Einsteiniano: 

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module3_weird_logic.htm 
 Joe Wolfe: "At this stage, many of my students say things like "The invariance of the speed of light among observers is impossible" or "I can't understand it". Well, it's not impossible. It's even more than possible, it is true. This is something that has been extensively measured, and many refinements to the Michelson and Morely experiment, and complementary experiments have confirmed this invariance to very great precision. As to understanding it, there isn't really much to understand. However surprising and weird it may be, it is the case. It's the law in our universe. The fact of the invariance of c doesn't take much understanding." 

Students' initial reaction is quite correct - the variability of the speed of light is almost obvious. The Doppler effect unequivocally shows that the speed of light relative to the observer does vary with the speed of the observer: 

http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/doppler 
 Albert Einstein Institute: "The frequency of a wave-like signal - such as sound or light - depends on the movement of the sender and of the receiver. This is known as the Doppler effect. (...) Here is an animation of the receiver moving towards the source: 

http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_static.gif (stationary receiver) 

http://www.einstein-online.info/images/spotlights/doppler/doppler_detector_blue.gif (moving receiver) 

By observing the two indicator lights, you can see for yourself that, once more, there is a blue-shift - the pulse frequency measured at the receiver is 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: As the receiver moves towards each pulse, the time until pulse and receiver meet up is shortened. In this particular animation, which has the receiver moving towards the source at one third the speed of the pulses themselves, four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses." 

Since "four pulses are received in the time it takes the source to emit three pulses", the speed of the pulses relative to the receiver is greater than their speed relative to the source, in violation of Einstein's relativity. 

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#380426

On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 at 1:01:39 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:

[the usual nonsense]

I checked this group's archive and noticed Pentcho DID change his writing
style... for worse. It used to be more or less ONE link per post, followed
by the usual inane comment. Now it's a bunch of each. An example from about
10 years ago:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/jS91O0C8ydA/vyAGjL8OYWYJ

--
Jan

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

#380461

http://www.gizmag.com/twisted-light-slower/42489/ 
 "The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant, but, according to scientists at the University of Ottawa, not that constant."

http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/23/Scientists-slow-down-light-particles/1191422035480 
 "The speed of light is a limit, not a constant - that's what researchers in Glasgow, Scotland, say. A group of them just proved that light can be slowed down, permanently."

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/417655/scitech/science/exclusive-this-pinay-physicist-can-slow-down-light-without-touching-it 
 "Although the maximum speed of light is a cosmological constant - made famous by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and E=mc^2 - it can, in fact, be slowed down: that's what optics do."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/faster-than-the-speed-of-light/ 
 "For generations, physicists believed there is nothing faster than light moving through a vacuum -- a speed of 186,000 miles per second. But in an experiment in Princeton, N.J., physicists sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering." 

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v406/n6793/full/406277a0.html 
 Nature 406, 277-279 (20 July 2000): "...a light pulse propagating through the atomic vapour cell appears at the exit side so much earlier than if it had propagated the same distance in a vacuum that the peak of the pulse appears to leave the cell before entering it."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn2796 
 "Electric signals can be transmitted at least four times faster than the speed of light using only basic equipment that would be found in virtually any college science department."

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Light-Pulses-That-Travel-Faster-than-Light-Created-267499.shtml 
 "The technique developed at NIST is called four-wave mixing, and it works by altering some parts of each individual light pulse. This makes the light move forward faster than it normally would when traveling through a vacuum."

Bingo the Einsteiniano's reaction:

http://www.infonetworkmarketing.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ignoranza-paure.jpg

Pentcho Valev

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

#380479

On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 2:43:22 AM UTC-6, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>
> http://www.gizmag.com/twisted-light-slower/42489/ 
>  "The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant, but, according
> to scientists at the University of Ottawa, not that constant."
> 
> http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2015/01/23/Scientists-slow-down-light-particles/1191422035480 
>  "The speed of light is a limit, not a constant - that's what researchers
> in Glasgow, Scotland, say. A group of them just proved that light can be
> slowed down, permanently."

[And more regurgitated links]

All of which do NOT support Pentcho's false assertion that the speed of
light is dependent upon the motion of its source.  Ho-hum.

Pentcho probably frequents this site:

http://zapatopi.net/afdb/

Gary

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

#380548

If, in order for Divine Albert's Divine Theory to remain true, an object should become longer than itself, it does become longer than itself (we all live in Einstein schizophrenic world don't we): 

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/Relativ/bugrivet.html 
 "In an attempt to squash a bug in a 1 cm deep hole, a rivet is used. But the rivet is only 0.8 cm long so it cannot reach the bug. The rivet is accelerated to 0.9c. (...) The paradox is not resolved." 

In the rivet's frame, "the end of the rivet hits the bottom of the hole before the head of the rivet hits the wall" - the bug is squashed. In the bug's frame, "the rivet head hits the wall when the rivet end is just 0.35 cm down in the hole" - the bug remains alive. 

The bug being squashed in the rivet's frame and alive in the bug's frame is fatal for Divine Albert's Divine Theory. So Bingo the Einsteiniano resorts to an idiotic ad hoc "requirement" - the rivet shank gets longer than itself and poor bug is squashed in both frames: 

http://math.ucr.edu/~jdp/Relativity/Bug_Rivet.html 
 John de Pillis Professor of Mathematics: "In fact, special relativity requires that after collision, the rivet shank length increases beyond its at-rest length d." 

http://brianclegg.blogspot.fr/2011_11_01_archive.html 
 Brian Clegg: "Unfortunately, though, the rivet is fired towards the table at a fair percentage of the speed of light. It's somewhat typical of this book that all it tells us about the speed is that γ is 2, which doesn't really give you an idea of how fast the rivet is going, but if my back of an envelope calculations are right, this is around 0.87 times the speed of light. Quite a fast rivet, then. (...) But here's the thing. Just because the head of the rivet has come to a sudden stop doesn't mean the whole rivet does. A wave has to pass along the rivet to its end saying 'Stop!' The end of the rivet will just keep on going until this wave, typically travelling at the speed of sound, reaches it. That fast-moving end will crash into the beetle long before the wave arrives. (...) Isn't physics great?" 

Note that, according to the Bingo cited above (aka Brian Clegg), the end of the rivet keeps on going at 87% the speed of light and a wave travelling at the speed of sound is chasing it in order to stop it! 

Pentcho Valev

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

#380569

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 2:43:43 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> If, in order for Divine Albert's Divine Theory to remain true,

Your choice of words tells us everything we need to know.

--
Jan

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

#380570

JanPB wrote:

> On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 2:43:43 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
>> If, in order for Divine Albert's Divine Theory to remain true,
> 
> Your choice of words tells us everything we need to know.

Economic Update: How Capitalism Changes Intimacy and Family
http://www.rdwolff.com/content/economic-update-how-capitalism-changes-intimacy-and-family

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

#380572

Użytkownik "JanPB"  napisał w wiadomości grup 
dyskusyjnych:7f751682-3103-4461-9c8b-c59951d23dff@googlegroups.com...

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 2:43:43 AM UTC-7, Pentcho Valev wrote:
> If, in order for Divine Albert's Divine Theory to remain true,

|Your choice of words tells us everything we need to know.

Surely a moron doesn't have to know much.

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

#380882

Bingo the Einsteiniano teaches that Einstein's 1905 second (constant-speed-of-light) postulate is a consequence of the first (the principle of relativity): 

http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/relativity/relativity3.html 
 Dave Slaven: "Einstein's first postulate seems perfectly reasonable. And his second postulate follows very reasonably from his first. How strange that the consequences will seem so unreasonable." 

One would expect this degree of silliness to be rare; actually it is commonplace among Bingos. Many of them teach the idiocy, and Luboš Motl is the champion - he has discovered that the second postulate "morally" follows from the first one:   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjRSYv7u3T4 
 Professor Raymond Flood (5:05): "A consequence of Einstein's principle of relativity is that the speed of light in a vacuum has the same value in two uniformly moving frames of reference." 

http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/12/lorentz-violation-and-deformed-special.html 
 Luboš Motl: "The second postulate of special relativity morally follows from the first one..." 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/05/29/four-reasons-to-not-fear-physics/ 
 Chad Orzel: "The core idea of Einstein's theory of relativity can fit on a bumper sticker: The Laws Of Physics Do Not Depend On How You're Moving. Absolutely everything else follows from the simple realization that physics must appear exactly the same to person in motion as to a person at rest - the constant speed of light, the slowing of time for moving observers, E=mc2, black holes, even the expanding universe (I've written a whole book about this, explained through imaginary conversations with my dog)." 

http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109/lectures/spec_rel.html 
 Michael Fowler: "Therefore, demanding that the laws of physics are the same in all inertial frames implies that the speed of any light wave, measured in any inertial frame, must be 186,300 miles per second. This then is the entire content of the Theory of Special Relativity: the Laws of Physics are the same in any inertial frame, and, in particular, any measurement of the speed of light in any inertial frame will always give 186,300 miles per second." 

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909081 
 Vesselin Petkov: "One of the fundamental facts of modern physics is the constancy of the speed of light. Einstein regarded it as one of the two postulates on which special relativity is based. So far, however, little attention has been paid to the status of this postulate when teaching special relativity. It turns out that the constancy of the speed of light is a direct consequence of the relativity principle, not an independent postulate. To see this let us consider the two postulates of special relativity as formulated by Einstein in his 1905 paper "On the electrodynamics of moving bodies": "the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good. We will raise this conjecture (the purport of which will hereafter be called the "Principle of Relativity") to the status of a postulate, and also introduce another postulate, which is only apparently irreconcilable with the former, namely, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of the motion of the emitting body". As the principle of relativity states that "the laws of physics are the same in all inertial reference frames" and the constancy of the speed of light means that "the speed of light is the same in all inertial reference frames (regardless of the motion of the source or the observer)" it follow that the second postulate is indeed a consequence of the first - the law describing the propagation of light is the same for all inertial observers." 

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web