🚀 go-pugleaf

"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:5498c5cf-94b4-463e-8d04-66621b0d60dc@j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> The subtlest practitioner of doublethink:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768
> Banesh Hoffmann: "In an accelerated sky laboratory, and therefore also
> in the corresponding earth laboratory, the frequence of arrival of
> light pulses is lower than the ticking rate of the upper clocks [LIE]
> even though all the clocks go at the same rate [TRUTH]. (...) As a
> result the experimenter at the ceiling of the sky laboratory will see
> with his own eyes that the floor clock is going at a slower rate than
> the ceiling clock [LIE] - even though, as I have stressed, both are
> going at the same rate [TRUTH]. (...) The gravitational red shift does
> not arise from changes in the intrinsic rates of clocks [TRUTH]. It
> arises from what befalls light signals as they traverse space and time
> in the presence of gravitation [TRUTH: WHAT BEFALLS LIGHT SIGNALS IS
> THAT THEIR SPEED VARIES]."
>
> Ordinary practitioners of doublethink:
>
> LIE:
>
> http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/02/scientists-obtain-highly-accurate-relativity-measurements.ars
> "For example, if we synchronize two clocks, take one of them to the
> top of a mountain for a while, and then bring it back to where the
> other clock is, the clock that sat still will be running behind the
> clock that was in the mountains - it was in a more accelerated frame,
> and time passed more slowly there."
>
> LIE:
>
> http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
> Chapter 14: "The equivalence principle has a striking consequence
> concerning the behavior of clocks in a gravitational field. It implies
> that higher clocks run faster than lower clocks. If you put a watch on
> top of a tower, and then stand on the ground, you will see the watch
> on the tower tick faster than an identical watch on your wrist. When
> you take the watch down and compare it to the one on your wrist, it
> will show more time elapsed."
>
> Definition of doublethink:
>
> http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17.html#seventeen
> George Orwell: "Doublethink means the power of holding two
> contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both
> of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories
> must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with
> reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself
> that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it
> would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to
> be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and
> hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since
> the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while
> retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To
> tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any
> fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary
> again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed,
> to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take
> account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably
> necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to
> exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is
> tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this
> knowledge ; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead
> of the truth. (...) It need hardly be said that the subtlest
> practitioners of doublethink are those who invented doublethink and
> know that it is a vast system of mental cheating. In our society,
> those who have the best knowledge of what is happening are also those
> who are furthest from seeing the world as it is. In general, the
> greater the understanding, the greater the delusion ; the more
> intelligent, the less sane."
>

Are you intelligent, Pentcho?