🚀 go-pugleaf

Einstein criminal cult have always been teaching that, although
Poincare, Lorentz etc. believed that length contraction, the famous
corollary of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate, was real,
Einstein's divine intuition discovered it was not and for that reason
there is a hymn "Divine Einstein" while nobody sings "Divine Poincare"
or "Divine Lorentz". The French Academie des Sciences offers the best
teaching:

http://www-drfmc.cea.fr/Phocea/file.php?class=std&file=Seminaires/342/t342_1.pdf
Gilles Cohen-Tannoudji: "Chez Poincare, la contraction des longueurs
et la dilatation des durees sont reelles.....Chez Einstein, la
contraction des longueurs et la dilatation des durees ne sont pas
reelles: elles sont le resultat d'un effet de perspective."

http://www.academie-sciences.fr/membres/in_memoriam/Einstein/Einstein_pdf/Einstein_Damour.pdf
Thibault Damour: "La <<contraction des longueurs>> avait, avant
Einstein, ete consideree par George Fitzgerald et Hendrik Lorentz.
Cependant, ils la consideraient comme un effet <<reel>> de contraction
dans l'<<espace absolu>>, alors que pour Einstein il s'agit d'un effet
de perspective spatio-temporelle."

Oxford University does not like the fact that the French Academie des
Sciences is so good at teaching the unreality of length contraction so
recently Oxford University made a breathtaking discovery: length
contraction is real after all:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/quant-ph/pdf/0601/0601182v1.pdf

http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=6603
"There are many things I might be asking when I ask someone to explain
length contraction. I might be asking, "Why do different inertial
observers (who are not at relative rest) disagree about the length of
a given (inertially moving) rod?" Or I might be asking, "Why is a
moving rod shorter than its stationary counterpart (of the same proper
length)?" Or I might be asking, "If you take a rod that is initially
at rest (in your frame of reference), and accelerate it, why is it
shorter after you accelerate it than it was before you accelerated
it?"......I'm not sure what Brown thinks about geometrical answers to
the first why-question, but he certainly thinks that geometrical
answers to the second two why-questions are bad explanations. He
thinks that good answers to these questions say something about the
way in which the forces holding the parts of the rod together depend
on velocity of the rod. Only that is a story of what causes the
particles to get closer together, and so what causes the rod to
shrink."

The problem is not that Einstein criminal cult teach both idiocies and
alternative idiocies. They have always done so. The problem is that
there is NO REACTION in Einstein zombie world. Science has died.
Irreversibly.

Pentcho Valev
pvalev@yahoo.com