🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mar 24, 7:52 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> When Einsteinians are sure that a particular constancy has nothing to
> do with the Original Divine Constancy given by Einstein's 1905 false
> light postulate, they boldly violate it, produce shock and horror in
> Einstein zombie world, point to a Great Revolution in Science that is
> just around the corner and make a lot of profit in terms of career and
> money:
>
> http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538
> Paul Davies: "Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is the only scientific
> formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here stands for the
> speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of the basic
> constants of physics. Or is it? In recent years a few maverick
> scientists have claimed that the speed of light might not be constant
> at all. Shock, horror! Does this mean the next Great Revolution in
> Science is just around the corner?"
>
> Then Einsteinians quickly return to the classical miraculous
> corollaries of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate that constitute
> the main money-spinner in Einstein criminal cult:
>
> http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/davies/davies_index.html
> Paul Davies: "Remarkably, Wells's story was written about ten years
> before the publication of Einstein's special theory of relativity was
> published. Special relativity showed that time is elastic, flexible.
> It isn't simply there -- the same for everybody, as Newton supposed.
> There's your time and my time, and they can differ depending on how we
> move. If I jump in a rocket ship and head off at nearly the speed of
> light to a nearby star and come back again ten earth years later, I
> may have aged only, say, one year. This is called the twins effect,
> because if I left my twin brother at home, when I returned we would no
> longer be the same age. He would be ten years older, and I only one
> year older. In effect, I will have time-travelled nine years into his
> future. Bizarre though this time-stretching effect seems, we know it's
> true.....Travel into the past is much more problematic, though. The
> significant thing is, our best understanding of the nature of time,
> which comes from Einstein's general theory of relativity, leaves open
> the possibility of travel into the past. It doesn't say you can't do
> it, there's no known law within the theory of relativity to forbid it.
> But finding a plausible scenario to actually travel into the past is
> not an easy thing......This topic is often cast in the parable of the
> grandmother paradox: you go back 50 years and kill your grandmother,
> ensuring that you were never born in the first place. One way around
> it is that if you go to a parallel world, and kill your parallel
> grandmother, you can return to your own time to find Granny still
> alive and well. That's a possible resolution. There isn't any
> consensus on it. Perhaps the existence of parallel realities is a
> worse prospect than that of causal loop paradoxes......Einstein's
> theory of relativity tells us that space is curved by gravity, so
> imagine that it was warped in such a way that it connected earth with
> the center of the galaxy through a tube or a tunnel that might only be
> a few kilometers long -- who knows? The point is that if a wormhole is
> possible, it can be adapted for use as a time machine, as shown by Kip
> Thorne at Caltech, and his colleagues, and now the subject of an
> international cottage industry in research papers. To travel in time,
> what you do is this. You first plunge through the wormhole and exit at
> the remote end, then you zoom back home again through ordinary space
> at nearly the speed of light. If the circumstances are right, you can
> get back before you leave."

When Einsteinians are sure that a particular constancy/variability of
the speed of light has nothing to do with Einstein's 1905 false light
postulate, they become so bold as to use it explicitly in their fights
for supremacy in Einstein criminal cult:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.09/stringtheory.html
Lee Smolin: "Well, every string theory that's been written down says
the speed of light is universal. But other ideas about quantum gravity
predict the speed of light has actually increased. And an experiment
on the Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope, launching next year, will
check this. So I've said, look, if the speed of light isn't universal,
that disconfirms string theory. But the string theorists say they
could probably invent versions of the theory that work either way.
We'd have to change our notion of what science is to accommodate this
proposition. You just can't do science on that basis."

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com