🚀 go-pugleaf

Six years ago the Royal Society solemnly informed the world that some
new Einstein in the Royal Society (perhaps Sir Stephen Hawking, why
not Sir Martin Rees) was going to rewrite relativity because the speed
of light may not always be the same and because "smoothness" of
radiation is a puzzle:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
Physics looks for new Einstein as nature rewrites laws of universe
Times Newspapers Ltd., September 9 2001
"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.....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. There is growing evidence that
light moved much faster during the early stages of our universe. 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.....Another puzzle is the so-called
"smoothness" of our universe, by which astronomers mean the
distribution of matter and radiation."

The Royal Society were sure that, although "light moved much faster
during the early stages of our universe", Einstein's light postulate -
the source of so many miracles - would remain intact. At least Sir
Stephen Hawking was sure since he had made an important discovery:

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/dice.html
Stephen Hawking: "Both Mitchell and Laplace thought of light as
consisting of particles, rather like cannon balls, that could be
slowed down by gravity, and made to fall back on the star. But a
famous experiment, carried out by two Americans, Michelson and Morley
in 1887, showed that light always travelled at a speed of one hundred
and eighty six thousand miles a second, no matter where it came from.
How then could gravity slow down light, and make it fall back."

However an extremely dangerous hypnotist called John Norton discovered
something that contradicted the discovery of Sir Stephen Hawking:

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001743/02/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as
evidence for the principle of relativity, whereas later writers almost
universally use it as support for the light postulate of special
relativity......THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT IS FULLY COMPATIBLE
WITH AN EMISSION THEORY OF LIGHT THAT CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."

Then something even more awful happened. Another extremely dangerous
hypnotist called John Stachel published a confession of Einstein that
convinced the Royal Society that "smoothness" of radiation should
never be called "puzzle":

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf/files/975547d7-2d00-433a-b7e3-4a09145525ca.pdf
Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
physics."

Sir Martin Rees was so excited that he personally wrote a slogan and
put it over the front door of the Royal Society:

DISCONTINUITY NEVER! SMOOTHNESS FOREVER IN THE ROYAL SOCIETY!

So the Royal Society cannot rewrite relativity. Perhaps only the
French Academie des Sciences can. The new Einstein may emerge there.
Who knows.

Pentcho Valev