Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science

On Sat, 6 Jan 2006, PD wrote:


jgreenfield@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


Hwang = Shapiro, who's conspiracy with (or direction by) the US Defence
Dept,
has tried to hide the true situation that  c'=c+v  as  proved beyond
reasonable doubt by
Bryan Wallace from radar ranging of venus in 1960's
http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html
(see whole site, especially pages 7,8)


OK, ya gotta ask yerself why on earth the US Defense Department would
try to hide whether c'=c or c'=c+v. Is it because:
1. Shapiro is fabulously but secretly wealthy and he's paid off
politicians to support his position?
2. It's a disinformation campaign to keep the Chinese and the Russians
wasting their time on instruments improperly designed for c'=c?
3. The cabal of physicists have threatened to blow up a device if they
cannot continue to say ridiculous and incorrect things?
4. It is dangerous to let the common population know the truth that
c'=c+v, because the correct knowledge could lead to the development of
all sorts of technology that we are not morally equipped to handle
responsibly?
5. The government once bought into c'=c in the development of the
atomic bomb, and it would be tremendous embarassment to reveal that the
bomb worked despite the error and we don't really understand at all how
it works.

It must be far more subtle than that. Unfortunately, Wallace is light on giving any numbers, but he does say that the radar ranging results had a c'=c+v _component_, which suggests that the "real results" were more like
c' = c + alpha v, where alpha << 1. I did allude to this earlier in discussion with Greenfield, noting that 5 times the expected error of 1.5 km is far less than the 250 km or so difference that c'=c+v should yield.

So it might be a case of hiding of c' = c + 0.005 v; the military implications of which must be truly astounding. It isn't just about a choice between Newton and Einstein, but it must be a whole mysterious new physics, just like Tom Bearden has been saying all along!

Therefore, I fully expect Greenfield to finally get off his arse to design, build, and implement a nice definitive cheap and replicable table-top experiment to show c' = c + v, basically using the deviation that c'=c+v requires from the Maxwell equations. Since it's so clearly obviously true that c'=c+v, I can only wonder why he hasn't bothered do so already.

--
Timo Nieminen - Home page: http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/nieminen/
E-prints: http://eprint.uq.edu.au/view/person/Nieminen,_Timo_A..html
Shrine to Spirits: http://www.users.bigpond.com/timo_nieminen/spirits.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science
    ... >>> Bryan Wallace from radar ranging of venus in 1960's ... >> atomic bomb, and it would be tremendous embarassment to reveal that the ... > discussion with Greenfield, noting that 5 times the expected error of 1.5 ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science
    ... has tried to hide the true situation that c'=c+v as proved beyond reasonable doubt by ... Bryan Wallace from radar ranging of venus in 1960's http://surf.de.uu.net/bookland/sci/farce/farce_6.html ... moon within mm, when tried simultaneously on venus, and analysed per ... c'=c+v means the Maxwell equations ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast