Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by NCTM or The Math Forum.

Notice: We are no longer accepting new posts, but the forums will continue to be readable.

Topic: THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Replies: 7   Last Post: Feb 1, 2013 10:54 AM

 Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
 Pentcho Valev Posts: 6,212 Registered: 12/13/04
Re: THE GREATEST HOAX IN THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE
Posted: Dec 30, 2012 4:46 AM

How blatantly Einsteinians can lie:

http://math.bu.edu/people/levit/AlbertEinstein.pdf
John Stachel: "Albert Einstein: A Man for the Millenium? (...) It was Albert Einstein (Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper, 1905) who first realized the need to replace such ideas, based on classical kinematics, with a new kinematics based on four key ideas: 1. Omit all reference to the hypothetical ether frame; 2. Take the failure of all attempts to detect absolute motion at face value, and postulate the relativity principle (all inertial frame of reference are equivalent) for all physical phenomena; 3. Add the WELL-TESTED postulate that the speed of light is independent of that of its source; 4. Combining 1, 2 and 3, one can derive the Lorentz transformations between any two inertial frames of reference."

John Stachel knows perfectly well that the postulate that the speed of light is independent of that of its source was by no means WELL-TESTED. Rather, in 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment UNEQUIVOCALLY confirmed the variable speed of light predicted by Newton's emission theory of light:

http://www.amazon.ca/Introduction-relativit%C3%A9-James-H-Smith/dp/B003YEIA3S
James H. Smith: "Si la lumière était un flot de particules mécaniques obéissant aux lois de la mécanique, il n'y aurait aucune difficulté à comprendre les résultats de l'expérience de Michelson-Morley.... Supposons, par exemple, qu'une fusée se déplace avec une vitesse (1/2)c par rapport à un observateur et qu'un rayon de lumière parte de son nez. Si la vitesse de la lumière signifiait vitesse des "particules" de la lumière par rapport à leur source, alors ces "particules" de lumière se déplaceraient à la vitesse c/2+c=(3/2)c par rapport à l'observateur. Mais ce comportement ne ressemble pas du tout à celui d'une onde, car les ondes se propagent à une certaine vitesse par rapport au milieu dans lequel elles se développent et non pas à une certaine vitesse par rapport à leur source. (...) Il nous faut insister sur le fait suivant: QUAND EINSTEIN PROPOSA QUE LA VITESSE DE LA LUMIÈRE SOIT INDÉPENDANTE DE CELLE DE LA SOURCE, IL N'EN EXISTAIT AUCUNE PREUVE EXPÉRIMENTALE."

http://www.aip.org/history/einstein/essay-einstein-relativity.htm
John Stachel: "An emission theory is perfectly compatible with the relativity principle. Thus, the M-M experiment presented no problem; nor is stellar abberration difficult to explain on this basis."

http://www.philoscience.unibe.ch/documents/kursarchiv/SS07/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "These efforts were long misled by an exaggeration of the importance of one experiment, the Michelson-Morley experiment, even though Einstein later had trouble recalling if he even knew of the experiment prior to his 1905 paper. This one experiment, in isolation, has little force. Its null result happened to be fully compatible with Newton's own emission theory of light. Located in the context of late 19th century electrodynamics when ether-based, wave theories of light predominated, however, it presented a serious problem that exercised the greatest theoretician of the day."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT POSTULATE."

Pentcho Valev

Date Subject Author
12/14/12 Pentcho Valev
12/15/12 Pentcho Valev
12/15/12 Pentcho Valev
12/17/12 Pentcho Valev
12/30/12 Pentcho Valev
1/2/13 Pentcho Valev
2/1/13 Pentcho Valev
12/17/12 Peter Duveen