🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 1, 2:14 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.rightsidenews.com/200904304606/energy-and-environment/rava...
> "Even the best of science "total stories" are theories still waiting
> to be replaced or altered massively, even repudiated: like Newton's
> theory of universal gravitation, and Darwin's theory of evolution, and
> Einstein's special theory of relativity. Everyone's welcome to try to
> kill them - by the strict rules, that is; not by politico-
> journalistic, statistical-shake-and-bake gunplay....Scientists modify
> existing theories and then destroy parts of them, without reducing the
> whole."
>
> Clearly not just "everyone" is welcome to try to kill special
> relativity: those who do not know how to "modify existing theories and
> then destroy parts of them, without reducing the whole", that is,
> those who do not know how to get rid of Einstein's 1905 false light
> postulate without abandoning time dilation, length contraction,
> Minkowski spacetime and similar idiocies, are not welcome at all. For
> the moment only Paul Davies, Sir Martin Rees, Stephen Hawking, Neil
> Turok, Lee Smolin and Joao Magueijo are welcome to try to kill special
> relativity because only they know how to do so "without reducing the
> whole":
>
> http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=5538
> Paul Davies: "Was Einstein wrong? Einstein's famous equation E=mc2 is
> the only scientific formula known to just about everyone. The "c" here
> stands for the speed of light. It is one of the most fundamental of
> the basic constants of physics. Or is it? In recent years a few
> maverick scientists have claimed that the speed of light might not be
> constant at all. Shock, horror! Does this mean the next Great
> Revolution in Science is 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. "It is becoming increasingly likely that the
> rules we had thought were fundamental through time and space are
> actually just bylaws for our bit of it," said Rees, whose new book,
> Our Cosmic Habitat, is published next month. "Creation is emerging as
> even stranger than we thought." 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....What he, Hawking and others such as
> Neil Turok, professor of maths and physics at Cambridge, are now
> looking at is the idea that our universe is just one of an infinite
> number of universes, with different laws of nature operating in each."
>
> http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm
> Lee Smolin: "Quantum theory was not the only theory that bothered
> Einstein. Few people have appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his
> own theories of relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's
> insight that the laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative
> motion and that the speed of light therefore must be always the same,
> no matter how the source or the observer moves. Among the consequences
> of that theory are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-
> legendary relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are
> relative, not absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS
> OF INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS
> WRONG WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."
>
> http://www.fqxi.org/data/articles/Searching_for_the_Golden_Spike.pdf
> "Loop quantum gravity also makes the heretical prediction that the
> speed of light depends on its frequency. That prediction violates
> special relativity, Einstein's rule that light in a vacuum travels at
> a constant speed for all observers..."
>
> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E7D8143FF932A05751...
> "As propounded by Einstein as an audaciously confident young patent
> clerk in 1905, relativity declares that the laws of physics, and in
> particular the speed of light -- 186,000 miles per second -- are the
> same no matter where you are or how fast you are moving. Generations
> of students and philosophers have struggled with the paradoxical
> consequences of Einstein's deceptively simple notion, which underlies
> all of modern physics and technology, wrestling with clocks that speed
> up and slow down, yardsticks that contract and expand and bad jokes
> using the word "relative."......"Perhaps relativity is too restrictive
> for what we need in quantum gravity," Dr. Magueijo said. "We need to
> drop a postulate, perhaps the constancy of the speed of light."
>
> Pentcho Valev
> pva...@yahoo.com

PV, it is all so simple.  Special Relativity (SR) is wrong.  General
Relativity (GR) is based on SR.  If SR is wrong, it follows logically
that GR is wrong.

What is wrong with SR?  The constancy of the speed of light in ANY
reference frame is wrong.  It follows that time dilation and length
contraction are wrong.

How does one correct SR and GR?  It is all so simple.  Throw it away.
The very foundations of SR/GR, frame-invariance of the speed of light
and frame-variance of time and space, is wrong.  There is no
correcting SR/GR without killing the whole.

What is so difficult about killing SR/GR?  The difficulty is that all
of 20th century physics, as exemplified by the Standard Model, rests
on a relativistic foundation.  To kill SR/GR is to kill the Standard
Model.  No physicist will admit that what they have been doing for
over a century is wrong.  No physicist will admit that their primary
theory/model of how the world works is wrong.  No physicist will even
attempt to fix this from the inside.  They will just wait for it to
crumble.  Theirs is a fight to the death.

Is there hope?  Of course there is.  That great theory begun by
Planck, and developed by Schrodinger and Heisenberg, Quantum Mechanics
(QM) is the future of physics.  QM holds that time is constant.  QM
has been corroborated by repeatable experiments.  We just need to
extricate QM back from the Standard Model, where QM was mangled in the
form of Quantum Field Theory... and for what purpose, to make it a
relativistic theory :-)

The great physicist, Feynman, could not correct the errors of QFT.
Being the best physicist of his time, he knew by default that all his
contemporaries could not fix that same error.  Thus he wrote the book
QED for the non-physicist, hoping that some non-physicist genius out
there may be able to lend a hand.

Feynman did not realize the solution was staring him in the face.
Ditch SR/GR, and you fix physics.