🚀 go-pugleaf

On Feb 4, 1:08 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The Royal Society performed the first revolution in 1919 but:
>
> http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-...
> "With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
> starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
> Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
> - Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
> cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
> nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
>
> The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
> c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
> 1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
> correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
> gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
> to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
> c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.
>
> Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
> and making money):
>
> http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
> "ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
> going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
> Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
> Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
> able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
> that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
> powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
> science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
> allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
> boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
> travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
> NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
> Scotia."
>
> Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
> revolution may be just around the corner):
>
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
> "A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
> thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
> relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
> Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
> laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
> also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
> EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
> 186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
> concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
> private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
> cosmologists."
>
> Recent hints at a second revolution:
>
> http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
> Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
> public."
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/0...
> Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
> persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
> respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
> "armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."
>
> And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
> really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
> EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
> 186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com


Do you also not believe in simple addition?