Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Einstein Was Wrong

Albert Einstein: Eccentric Genius, or Agent of The Matrix?

Background

He failed math, couldn't get a position as a teacher ( because everyone found him irritating ), treated his 1st wife like dirt, divorced her, married again, treated her like dirt too. Einstein considered himself a pacifist and a humanitarian; in reality, he was a supporter of Zionism.

Mission

Destroy the aether.

Step 1: Establish Credibility

Einstein 1st published papers on " Brownian Motion " ( proving the existence of atoms ) and " The Photoelectric Effect " ( explaining the " black-body radiation " by hypothesizing the quantization of light ); these were good science, establishing some credibility for Einstein.

Step 2: Special Relativity

In 1905, he published the Special Theory of Relativity, which is based on the speed of light in a vacuum. Since there's no such thing as a vacuum ( the aether is the medium through which the disturbance propagates ), Special Relativity is wrong. This is why Einstein was subjected to ridicule and scorn by the real scientists of the day when he 1st published this - not because his " theory " was so advanced, but because it doesn't make any sense; it's gibberish.

Those who were willing to pretend that it made sense were rewarded with funding and titles; those who did not were ( and are ) dismissed and ridiculed as " cranks ". From Wikipedia.org http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_einstein
" In Einstein's view, many of them simply could not understand the mathematics involved. " This is a typical reaction of the psychopath to anyone who dares to call him on his lie; I'm only surprised he didn't tell them to " go see a psychiatrist ".

( Note: French astronomer Camille Flammarion, in his novel Lumen, had described riding a beam of light, and what that would look like to the rider - it was 1st published in 1872.)

Bell's Theorem also " proves " ( mathematically ) that Einstein's Relativity is wrong - the supposed speed of light is not sacrosanct. In 1982, Alan Aspect, et al, in a series of experiments, proved Bell's Theorem true - " spooky action at a distance ", indeed.

Step 3: General Relativity

In 1915, Einstein published the General Theory of Relativity; this was yet another attempt to " eliminate " the aether, attacking the " problem " from another angle. Positing that length, width, and height are united with time, he explained away the Force of gravity as the curvature of this " fabric of space-time ".

( Flammarion said, in 1921, " A space with a shape, curved! Mr. Einstein, you know that space-time, the fourth dimension, is already in the Encyclopédie de Diderot et D’Alembert. But it has not a shape! "
http://www.uv.es/~ten/womeneng.htm )

This was allegedly proved in 1919, during a solar eclipse, with the observation of light curving around the Sun. However, it was long known that a wave propagating through a medium would curve around an object, so when they " confirmed " that light curved around the Sun, they did not confirm General Relativity. Why, then, did they take it as confirmation of it? Because the whole point was to get rid of the aether. Einstein's alleged motivation - that he didn't like gravity being a " mysterious force " - was a smokescreen.

Stupid Einstein Dummy Boy

Well, Agent Smith, er, I mean, Albert Einstein didn't get everything wrong; his statement about the Uncertainty Principle - " God does not play dice " - was right on the money. http://www.thenazareneway.com/cause_and_effect.htm

Way to go, Einstein.

3 comments:

  1. Scientific realism is the popular myth of naive 19th-century positivists.

    The history of theoretical science shows repeatedly that today's universally (or nearly so) accepted "truth" is tomorrow's discarded error when "those really silly people believed such ignorant things."

    Dr. Larry Laudan (Science and Values), published his list of 33 terribly successful scientific theories that were "proven to be true conclusively" -- which are now rejected by their respective scientific communities (from classical thermodynamics to atomic models).

    Moreover, it has been known for hundreds of years that scientific models, on the realist view or that of verisimilitude, reasons in the form of "IF A, THEN B; B, THEREFORE A." As in "If my model is true, we should find predictions X,Y, and Z fulfilled. We do find X,Y, and Z, therefore, my model is true.

    This is known as the fallacy of affirming the consequent in formal logic. It does not matter what the proleptic predicates are, the FORM of hte argument renders ALL such models INVALID.

    One commentator put it this way: "If the history of science were a single person, we certainly would not let that person drive heavy machinery or carry sharo objects."

    ReplyDelete
  2. You may have a look to http://allais.maurice.free.fr/English/Science.htmMaurice Allais, initially, carried out his own experiments which led him to observe the existence of phenomena incompatible with the commonly accepted theories. He drew from them his own conclusions according to which the velocity of the light does not have a constant value but varies (slightly) according to the direction. What led him to show the existence of " aether " and of the anisotropy of space.

    In a second time and to consolidate his own results, Maurice Allais was brought to reexamine the detail of the results of the experiments which had been carried out in the past on the same subject in the U.S.A. by Michelson and Morley in 1887, by Morley and Miller in 1902, 1904 and 1905, and by Miller in 1925, 1926 and 1930. He then could observe that these results contain the same anomalies which were not noticed at the time by the experimenters or were neglected.

    Maurice Allais affirms today with force that these anomalies are real and indisputable and that they call into question the laws of relativity, discovered by Lorentz and Poincaré, and more known under the name of Laws of Einstein.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous7:34 PM

    Light speed is not Constant (to observer) !!

    All that we receive with our eyes are the facts of the past (unchangeable). Wavelength of incident light is coming from the past. On incident light, a formula c = λ f stands up. And λ is unchangeable (by our motion). Terms f and c change.

    Sorry, I can’t receive E-mail. I don’t have PC.

    http://www.geocities.co.jp/Technopolis/2561/eng.html

    ReplyDelete