🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: sci.physics.relativity
Article #6158

Re: DELIBERATELY AMBIGUOUS EINSTEINIANS

#6158
From: Pentcho Valev
Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:45
68 lines
5415 bytes
On Nov 9, 6:28 pm, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/275065
> "These "cosmic bullets" are the highest energy particles in the
> universe, packing wallops 100 time higher than anything produced in
> the most powerful atom smasher on Earth. Scientists have long been
> tantalized by glimpses of this rare variety of cosmic rays and
> conflicting explanations for their existence abounded, even
> challenging Einstein's theory of special relativity."
>
> How can these "cosmic bullets" challenge Einstein's theory of special
> relativity? Has their "highest energy" anything to do with their
> speed?
>
> http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/275065
> "Another positive part of the story is that special relativity has
> survived its most severe test," Smolin said.
>
> Frenchmen would say: "Oh la la oh la la oh oh!". How "cosmic bullets"
> challenged Einstein's special relativity and how Einstein's special
> relativity survived in the end will probably remain a secret. At least
> nobody in Einstein zombie world would ever ask Einsteinians to
> explain.

Unlike Frenchmen, Anglophones say "Uh oh Einstein" in such cases. But
some mystery always remains so that, if Einstein's false light
postulate is to be attacked, this could only be done by Lee Smolin in
the Perimeter Institute.  Only Lee Smolin in the Perimeter Institute
knows how Einstein criminal cult can extract money from attacks
against Einstein's false light postulate:

http://www.universetoday.com/2007/10/03/high-energy-gamma-rays-go-slower-than-the-speed-of-light/
"The speed of light is the speed of light, and that's that. Right?
Well, maybe not. Try and figure this out. Astronomers studying
radiation coming from a distant galaxy found that the high energy
gamma rays arrived a few minutes after the lower-energy photons, even
though they were emitted at the same time. If true, this result would
overturn Einstein's theory of relativity, which says that all photons
should move at the speed of light. Uh oh Einstein."

http://edge.org/3rd_culture/smolin03/smolin03_index.html
Lee Smolin: "Now, here is the really interesting part: Some of the
effects predicted by the theory appear to be in conflict with one of
the principles of Einstein's special theory of relativity, the theory
that says that the speed of light is a universal constant. It's the
same for all photons, and it is independent of the motion of the
sender or observer. How is this possible, if that theory is itself
based on the principles of relativity? The principle of the constancy
of the speed of light is part of special relativity, but we quantized
Einstein's general theory of relativity. Because Einstein's special
theory is only a kind of approximation to his general theory, we can
implement the principles of the latter but find modifications to the
former. And this is what seems to be happening! So Gambini, Pullin,
and others calculated how light travels in a quantum geometry and
found that the theory predicts that the speed of light has a small
dependence on energy. Photons of higher energy travel slightly slower
than low-energy photons....A very exciting question we are now
wrestling with is, How drastically shall we be forced to modify
Einstein's special theory of relativity if the predicted effect is
observed? The most severe possibility is that the principle of
relativity simply fails....But there is another possibility. This is
that the principle of relativity is preserved, but Einstein's special
theory of relativity requires modification so as to allow photons to
have a speed that depends on energy. The most shocking thing I have
learned in the last year is that this is a real possibility. A photon
can have an energy-dependent speed without violating the principle of
relativity!"

Pentcho Valev
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1194677127.822819.101560@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
References: <1194625738.212829.167640@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10f545,9e88c881a53ef8f
X-Google-Thread: 10b271,9e88c881a53ef8f
X-Google-Thread: f74ae,9e88c881a53ef8f
X-Google-Thread: fa4c1,9e88c881a53ef8f
X-Google-Thread: 1139f8,9e88c881a53ef8f
X-Google-Attributes: gid10f545,gid10b271,gidf74ae,gidfa4c1,gid1139f8,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From:  Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.astro,fr.sci.physique,fr.sci.maths
Subject: Re: DELIBERATELY AMBIGUOUS EINSTEINIANS
Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2007 22:45:27 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 69
Message-ID: <1194677127.822819.101560@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
References: <1194625738.212829.167640@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.91.141.163
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1194677128 25289 127.0.0.1 (10 Nov 2007 06:45:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 06:45:28 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <1194625738.212829.167640@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.04506.30),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com; posting-host=85.91.141.163;
   posting-account=ps2QrAMAAAA6_jCuRt2JEIpn5Otqf_w0