The Math Forum

Search All of the Math Forum:

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

Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Inflation Is Not Science! How About Einstein's Relativity?
Replies: 3   Last Post: Oct 3, 2017 2:57 AM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
Pentcho Valev

Posts: 5,902
Registered: 12/13/04
Re: Inflation Is Not Science! How About Einstein's Relativity?
Posted: Oct 3, 2017 2:57 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

The parameters of an empirical (non-deductive) model do not correspond to physical properties of the system - they are just fudge factors. Here is the most idiotic fudge factor in Einstein's general relativity:

The miraculous gravitational time dilation fabricated by Einstein in 1911 and the gravitational redshift are only compatible if light in a gravitational field behaves in an absurd way: Its speed DECREASES as the light falls towards the source of gravity - the acceleration of falling photons is NEGATIVE (in the gravitational field of the Earth it is -2g). The idiotic negative acceleration of photons, -2g, was a fudge factor Einstein and his mathematical friends introduced in 1915:
Albert Einstein: "Second, this consequence shows that the law of the constancy of the speed of light no longer holds, according to the general theory of relativity, in spaces that have gravitational fields. As a simple geometric consideration shows, the curvature of light rays occurs only in spaces where the speed of light is spatially variable."
"The change in speed of light with change in height is dc/dh=g/c."
"Contrary to intuition, the speed of light (properly defined) decreases as the black hole is approached."
"Einstein wrote this paper in 1911 in German. [...] will find in section 3 of that paper Einstein's derivation of the variable speed of light in a gravitational potential, eqn (3). The result is: c'=c0(1+phi/c^2) where phi is the gravitational potential relative to the point where the speed of light c0 is measured. Simply put: Light appears to travel slower in stronger gravitational fields (near bigger mass). [...] You can find a more sophisticated derivation later by Einstein (1955) from the full theory of general relativity in the weak field approximation. [...] Namely the 1955 approximation shows a variation in km/sec twice as much as first predicted in 1911."
"Specifically, Einstein wrote in 1911 that the speed of light at a place with the gravitational potential phi would be c(1+phi/c^2), where c is the nominal speed of light in the absence of gravity. In geometrical units we define c=1, so Einstein's 1911 formula can be written simply as c'=1+phi. However, this formula for the speed of light (not to mention this whole approach to gravity) turned out to be incorrect, as Einstein realized during the years leading up to 1915 and the completion of the general theory. [...] ...we have c_r =1+2phi, which corresponds to Einstein's 1911 equation, except that we have a factor of 2 instead of 1 on the potential term."

Einsteinians have no idea why the speed of light should behave in such an idiotic way and avoid the topic. The above relevant references are perhaps the only ones that can be found on the Internet.

Pentcho Valev

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© The Math Forum at NCTM 1994-2017. All Rights Reserved.