Discussion:
Einstein's Relativity: Time to Answer the "Embarrassing Question"
(trop ancien pour répondre)
Pentcho Valev
2018-05-27 07:53:35 UTC
Permalink
"This paper investigates an alternative possibility: that the critics were right and that the success of Einstein's theory in overcoming them was due to its strengths as an ideology rather than as a science. The clock paradox illustrates how relativity theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic. These same inconsistencies, however, make the theory ideologically powerful. [...] The gatekeepers of professional physics in the universities and research institutes are disinclined to support or employ anyone who raises problems over the elementary inconsistencies of relativity. A winnowing out process has made it very difficult for critics of Einstein to achieve or maintain professional status. Relativists are then able to use the argument of authority to discredit these critics. Were relativists to admit that Einstein may have made a series of elementary logical errors, they would be faced with THE EMBARRASSING QUESTION OF WHY THIS HAD NOT BEEN NOTICED EARLIER. Under these circumstances the marginalisation of antirelativists, unjustified on scientific grounds, is eminently justifiable on grounds of realpolitik. Supporters of relativity theory have protected both the theory and their own reputations by shutting their opponents out of professional discourse. [...] The triumph of relativity theory represents the triumph of ideology not only in the profession of physics bur also in the philosophy of science." http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02691720902741399

Loading Image...

Pentcho Valev
Pentcho Valev
2018-05-27 20:29:21 UTC
Permalink
The speed of light is VARIABLE but... establishing the truth would be suicidal:

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much" https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed

"Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

The speed of light is OBVIOUSLY variable:

Stationary light source; moving receiver: Loading Image...

Frequency measured by the source: f; by the moving receiver: f' > f.

Speed of pulses relative to the source: c = df (d is distance between pulses).

Speed of pulses relative to the moving receiver:

c' = df' > c

in violation of Einstein's relativity.

Any relevant experiment, if correctly interpreted, shows that the speed of light is VARIABLE:

John Norton: "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

Pentcho Valev

Loading...