Re: Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- From: "Tom Potter" <tdp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 20:46:14 +0800
"Igor" <thoovler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:3ba89043-6ead-4dce-aa25-4c88cb588784@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 21, 4:44 pm, Strich 9 <Strich.9.2cac...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Why did Einstein fail so many times? Why is his theory inadequate at
explaining the universe and bridging the gap to the quantum world?
The answer is simple. *Einstein worshipped light. *
Around his time, light was just discovered to have dual, seemingly
incompatible properties of wave and particle. Somehow, the *-duality of
light-* signified its divine nature.
As destiny would have it, around the same time, Maxwell came up with a
constant which turned out to be light. A dual nature, and then *a
constant*, light must really be divine.
DEEP TRUTHS.
And then the first revelation. The time metric can be converted to the
space metric simply by multiplication with light. A -*four-dimensional
space-time manifold*-. It rolls off the tongue like a prayer or
mantra.
Einstein meditated some more. What must it be like to sit on a
lightbeam? What must it be like to sit with God the creator? *-Time
would stand still, and being be reduced to point-like symmetry.-*
Another revelation. This is exactly what the Lorentz transforms
compute. Einstein was now a firm believer. He was the messenger, sent
to deliver the equations of God, and sent to convey understanding of
the universe to the rest of humanity.
MORE DEEP TRUTHS.
But what about Quantum Theory? Surely it must be wrong! To go against
the predictions of Relativity, the far superior and divine revelation.
The EPR Paradox will prove QT wrong. *-God does not play die in the
universe.-* Only the messenger himself could have stated it better. And
only the messenger himself could be so wrong.
Meanwhile, another paradox was brewing. Einstein figured it out. There
was no time dilation nor length contraction. But what about God, the
duality of light, the constancy of light, the standstill of time in the
beam of light, and how all things seem neatly in place? It was too good
to let go. There was no turning back. Fudge the paradox. Use GR to
explain the SR paradox. The mathematical complexity of GR will hold the
enemy. GR was a new field. There were no GR experts then, and there are
none now. Because the expert will see the error readily as clear as
day. As of today, GR and its ailing twin, SR, are run by
pseudo-scientists.
And this is what happens, and continues to happen, in physics
classrooms around the world. Lucky are the engineering students, they
swallow the lie and go on to their fields. The physics majors have to
live with the lie, and one day teach it. What happens when a smart
student comes along? Hope that they go to engineering. Give them
reading material, and hope that at the end of the semester their active
minds are off to something else. But the professor is condemned to go
through the same ordeal semester after semester. He has already
perfected the answers: -you have much to learn; read further and you
will see; no more questions; I am a busy man.-
But what about the few bright physicists who never forget the error and
are never led astray by the deception? They stay away from relativity as
far as possible, and go into quantum physics.
And that is how the history of physics will be told decades from now,
when the world wonders how a century went by, and a simple error was
overlooked, again and again, seemingly by the best minds in science.
As for me, true man of science, and others with me, we shall continue
to chip away at this heresy. Truth, represented mathematically by the
solutions to equations, eventually comes. The universe, has truth
written in its equations.
--
Strich 9
-Languishing in the mediocre middle won't get you anywhere. Besides,
-if you can prove Einstein was incorrect, show us how. Any idiot can
-spew nonsense on usenet. You seem to have a tendency to go on and on
-without saying anything of substance. The ball's in your hands. Put
-up or shut up!
"Igor" makes a good point!
"Any idiot can spew <useless> nonsense on Usenet."
or for that matter in the media, books, magazines, etc.
The question is:
"What was "Einstein was correct" about?
Time travel, worm holes, warping through space,
the beginning and end of the universe,
the mind of God, dark matter, dragging space around,
rubber clocks and rulers, gravitons, etc?
The "correctness" of a model lies in its' utility.
Hopefully Igor will start with T= Q
and demonstrate how General Relativity
can be used to compute the tides at a few places,
a feat that Newton accomplished centuries ago
using his primitive model,
and hand calculations.
I will be looking forward to seeing
Igor demonstrate the usefulness of General Relativity
to society.
Any idiot can spew <useless> nonsense on Usenet
and go on and on without saying anything of <value>..
The ball's in Igor's hands.
Put up or shut up!
--
Tom Potter
http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/index.html
http://notsocrazyideas.blogspot.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter/
http://tdp1001.wiki.zoho.com
http://groups.msn.com/PotterPhotos
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/dingleberry.htm
.
- References:
- Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- From: Strich 9
- Re: Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- From: Igor
- Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- Prev by Date: Re: Clock-Tech made a quantum leap at Einstein's 1906 Swiss patent office.
- Next by Date: Re: Does Relativity generate more heat than light?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- Next by thread: Re: Why EINSTEIN failed. An analyses.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
