• Einstein and Feynman Brainwash the Gullible World

    From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 13 04:17:10 2022
    Einstein and Feynman used to teach that constant speed of light, Einstein's 1905 second postulate, is a logical consequence of the principle of relativity, Einstein's 1905 first postulate (variable speed of light "comes into conflict" with the principle
    of relativity):

    Albert Einstein: "If a ray of light be sent along the embankment, we see from the above that the tip of the ray will be transmitted with the velocity c relative to the embankment. Now let us suppose that our railway carriage is again travelling along the
    railway lines with the velocity v, and that its direction is the same as that of the ray of light, but its velocity of course much less. Let us inquire about the velocity of propagation of the ray of light relative to the carriage. It is obvious that we
    can here apply the consideration of the previous section, since the ray of light plays the part of the man walking along relatively to the carriage. The velocity W of the man relative to the embankment is here replaced by the velocity of light relative
    to the embankment. w is the required velocity of light with respect to the carriage, and we have w = c - v. The velocity of propagation of a ray of light relative to the carriage thus comes out smaller than c. But this result comes into conflict with the
    principle of relativity set forth in Section 5." http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html

    Richard Feynman: "The principle of relativity was first stated by Newton, in one of his corollaries to the laws of motion: “The motions of bodies included in a given space are the same among themselves, whether that space is at rest or moves uniformly
    forward in a straight line.” This means, for example, that if a space ship is drifting along at a uniform speed, all experiments performed in the space ship and all the phenomena in the space ship will appear the same as if the ship were not moving,
    provided, of course, that one does not look outside...Suppose we are riding in a car that is going at a speed u, and light from the rear is going past the car with speed c...according to the Galilean transformation the apparent speed of the passing light,
    as we measure it in the car, should not be c but should be c-u. For instance, if the car is going 100,000 mi/sec, and the light is going 186,000 mi/sec, then apparently the light going past the car should go 86,000 mi/sec. In any case, by measuring the
    speed of the light going past the car (if the Galilean transformation is correct for light), one could determine the speed of the car. A number of experiments based on this general idea were performed to determine the velocity of the earth, but they all
    failed - they gave no velocity at all. We shall discuss one of these experiments [the Michelson-Morley experiment] in detail..." https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_15.html

    Today's Einsteinians diligently parrot the Einstein-Feynman hoax:

    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." http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/relativity/
    relativity3.html

    Professor Raymond Flood: "A consequence of Einstein's principle of relativity is that the speed of light in vacuum has the same value in two uniformly moving frames of reference." https://youtu.be/IjRSYv7u3T4?t=304

    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://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/05/29/four-reasons-to-not-fear-physics/

    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://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109/
    lectures/spec_rel.html

    Leonard Susskind: "The principle of relativity is that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame. That principle existed before Einstein. Einstein added one law of physics - the law of physics is that the speed of light is the speed of
    light, c. If you combine the two things together - that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and that it's a law of physics that light moves with certain velocity, you come to the conclusion that light must move with the same
    velocity in every reference frame. Why? Because the principle of relativity says that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and Einstein announced that it is a law of physics that light moves with a certain velocity." https://youtu.
    be/toGH5BdgRZ4?t=626

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

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pentcho Valev@21:1/5 to All on Sat Aug 13 14:36:13 2022
    Why did Einstein and Feynman find it profitable to deduce Einstein's 1905 second (constant-speed-of-light) postulate from the first postulate, the principle of relativity? In logic, if the premise is true, the deduced consequence cannot be false - it is
    true as well. In this particular case the premise, the principle of relativity, is true. So Einstein-Feynman deduction, if valid, is in fact an unequivocal proof of the constancy of the speed of light. The deduction is not valid of course, but post-truth
    scientists neither understand why nor care.

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

    Pentcho Valev

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Lou@21:1/5 to Pentcho Valev on Sun Aug 14 04:30:14 2022
    On Saturday, 13 August 2022 at 12:17:12 UTC+1, Pentcho Valev wrote:
    Einstein and Feynman used to teach that constant speed of light, Einstein's 1905 second postulate, is a logical consequence of the principle of relativity, Einstein's 1905 first postulate (variable speed of light "comes into conflict" with the
    principle of relativity):

    Albert Einstein: "If a ray of light be sent along the embankment, we see from the above that the tip of the ray will be transmitted with the velocity c relative to the embankment. Now let us suppose that our railway carriage is again travelling along
    the railway lines with the velocity v, and that its direction is the same as that of the ray of light, but its velocity of course much less. Let us inquire about the velocity of propagation of the ray of light relative to the carriage. It is obvious that
    we can here apply the consideration of the previous section, since the ray of light plays the part of the man walking along relatively to the carriage. The velocity W of the man relative to the embankment is here replaced by the velocity of light
    relative to the embankment. w is the required velocity of light with respect to the carriage, and we have w = c - v. The velocity of propagation of a ray of light relative to the carriage thus comes out smaller than c. But this result comes into conflict
    with the principle of relativity set forth in Section 5." http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html

    Richard Feynman: "The principle of relativity was first stated by Newton, in one of his corollaries to the laws of motion: “The motions of bodies included in a given space are the same among themselves, whether that space is at rest or moves
    uniformly forward in a straight line.” This means, for example, that if a space ship is drifting along at a uniform speed, all experiments performed in the space ship and all the phenomena in the space ship will appear the same as if the ship were not
    moving, provided, of course, that one does not look outside...Suppose we are riding in a car that is going at a speed u, and light from the rear is going past the car with speed c...according to the Galilean transformation the apparent speed of the
    passing light, as we measure it in the car, should not be c but should be c-u. For instance, if the car is going 100,000 mi/sec, and the light is going 186,000 mi/sec, then apparently the light going past the car should go 86,000 mi/sec. In any case, by
    measuring the speed of the light going past the car (if the Galilean transformation is correct for light), one could determine the speed of the car. A number of experiments based on this general idea were performed to determine the velocity of the earth,
    but they all failed - they gave no velocity at all. We shall discuss one of these experiments [the Michelson-Morley experiment] in detail..." https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_15.html

    Today's Einsteinians diligently parrot the Einstein-Feynman hoax:

    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." http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Physics/relativity/
    relativity3.html

    Professor Raymond Flood: "A consequence of Einstein's principle of relativity is that the speed of light in vacuum has the same value in two uniformly moving frames of reference." https://youtu.be/IjRSYv7u3T4?t=304

    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://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/05/29/four-reasons-to-not-fear-physics/

    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://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/109/
    lectures/spec_rel.html

    Leonard Susskind: "The principle of relativity is that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame. That principle existed before Einstein. Einstein added one law of physics - the law of physics is that the speed of light is the speed of
    light, c. If you combine the two things together - that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and that it's a law of physics that light moves with certain velocity, you come to the conclusion that light must move with the same
    velocity in every reference frame. Why? Because the principle of relativity says that the laws of physics are the same in every reference frame, and Einstein announced that it is a law of physics that light moves with a certain velocity." https://youtu.
    be/toGH5BdgRZ4?t=626

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

    Pentcho Valev

    The reason why the Einstein religious clerics get it so wrong about the speed of light is
    that they incorrectly deduce that their speed of light “law of physics”, which said that
    light always moved at c relative to the observor, was not only false and not based
    upon any empirical evidence. It contradicted experimental observations like the MMX.
    Which clearly showed that the speed of light is always only c relative to the source.
    Fortunately in the next few months the JWST data will continue to disprove the BBT predictions of an early epoch universe where the BBT fanatics say few if any
    mature large galaxies should be observed
    In fact already the non expanding model is being verified by JWST data showing more numerous mature galaxies at very high redshift. Although deniers in the BBT
    community are copying their idol Trump who when confronted with evidence showing
    he was a liar...bleated...FAKE NEWS! (As we can see in last few days when the BBT
    fanatics claimed the large mature metal rich galaxies observed in the early universe
    by JWST, where none were predicted by BBT, were actually ...IMPOSTERS!!😂😂😂)
    At this point Alberts ridiculous fantasies of relativity and the particle nature of light
    will be thrown into the rubbish bin of fake science along with other flat earth theories.
    Because the only reason the BBT was invented in 1929...was to save alberts photon/relativity fantasy from being refuted by the empirical observation that yes,
    contrary to Alberts delusions...light did indeed lose frequency over distance.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)