🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 2, 4:12 am, Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On a sunny day (Fri, 1 May 2009 22:34:37 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Pentcho
> Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> <5112e7a6-900b-48c5-b6be-f94e7f0e1...@z7g2000vbh.googlegroups.com>:
>
>
>
> >Consider one of Einsteiniana's demonstrations of superluminal (moving
> >faster than c=300000km/s) signals:
>
> >http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html
>
> >Any Einsteinian would tell you that, although superluminal signals
> >travel faster than c=300000km/s, they do not violate Einstein's
> >relativity. Then the Einsteinian may refer you to some of the numerous
> >idiotic explanations of this non-violability devised in Einsteiniana.
> >Perhaps the most idiotic one is: Superluminal signals cannot violate
> >relativity because they carry no information. You are shocked, first
> >by the oxymoron "signal carrying no information", then by the
> >breathtaking ability of Einstein's relativity to distinguish between
> >"signals carrying no information" and other signals, somewhat more
> >dangerous, that do carry some information.
>
> >Now ignore superluminal signals and just take a look at the wave as it
> >travels towards the observer (receiver). Then imagine that the
> >observer suddenly starts moving against the wave. The frequency he
> >measures will obviously increase and....what else will change? Perhaps
> >the speed of the wave (relative to the observer) will increase?
> >Perhaps the wavelength will decrease? What does the picture predict?
>
> >Einsteinians clearly see that the wavelength is independent of the
> >speed of the observer (that is, will remain constant) but would tell
> >you that it will decrease. So they would save relativity.
>
> >Honest scientists also see that the wavelength is independent of the
> >speed of the observer (that is, will remain constant) and would tell
> >you that the speed of the wave (relative to the observer) will
> >unavoidably increase. So they would kill relativity.
>
> >The crucial question is: Why are honest scientists silent in
> >Einstein's world?
>
> >Pentcho Valev
> >pva...@yahoo.com
>
> There was an interesting article on nytimes.com some years ago about how
> people perceive things.
> When people are very young, kids, they see something and ask their parents
> 'what is that?', and the parent will reply with their concept of it.
> That forms paths in the brain of the kid, who then forever does not analyse
> himself, but uses that now hardwired surrogate of reality when he sees that thing again.
> This is how our learning process works, and a bit later the same thing happens in school:
> Einsteinian crap is dished out to a simple question about Doppler.
> The pupil stores the answer, and is now for the rest of his life a disabled
> thinker as far as logic is concerned.
> Generation after generation keeps parroting the crap, the Einstein dogma
> 'nothing moves faster then light'.
> The most idiotic math models are constructed, and if anyone ever asks 'Why', then the God Einstein
> 'a genius who knew better then everybody else' is invoked in the reply.
> 'You are too dumb to understand relativity' (Carlip?).
> Well, there is nothing to understand in relativity.
> At the best it is curve fitting, at a bit closer look it is a modified field theory,
> and at a close inspection it breaks down in QM, in observation, but the worst is, that is killed physics,
> and made it into a joke since WW2's e=m.c^2.
> What have it given us:
> 1) Large particle colliders for example the LHC that smash particles together with ever more energy.
>  Those particles pushed by EM waves, so those will never go faster then those EM waves, the surfer never goes
>  faster then the waves, higher and thus steeper waves, alias more energy, will make the surfer arrive
>  a fraction earlier, that is all.
> 2) Nuclear fusion, alias the ITER project, where there is _never_ a break even, using billions to build a not
>  working power plant.
>  No cheap energy, no new energy
> 3) LIGO, looking for gravity waves, never seeing any, what if gravity was faster then c?,
>  what if there are no gravity waves, as it seems to be the case, then Einsteinian crap would be exposed for what it is...
>  How long do they look, how many times do they have to increase sensitivity, were all their original calculations wrong>?
>  But those were made by relativity experts.
> 4) The same relativity experts worked on gravity probe B to measure frame dragging, but clearly they failed to even do the basic
>  mechanics of rotating some balls in space...
>  Failed project, wasted money.
> 5) String theory, an other epicycles, 'can only be understood by the most learned mathematicians', well, I had a look,
>  clearly I am not one of those, or more honestly: I got fed up when looking up all that old math stuff, so
>  an other phantasy world I have no liking to go into.
>  I guess if you fiddle with 'half a full bottle = a half an empty bottle' long enough,
>  and multiply by 2, you can prove nothing is everything.
>  I lost string theory after one rotation too many, forgot how many times I rotated, and could not visualise what it now looked like.
>  More crap.
> So... physics has become 'physicks'. And a large parrot choir sings 'Einstein Einstein, he is God'.
> He was, in my view, just a Jew who fled Germany for the Nazis, and was used by US propaganda to help the image of Jews a bit.
> Too bad they chose the wrong guy, he just makes them look like idiots.
> But anybody who walks the street with a big back hat thinking that provides a better connection with 'God' IS an idiot, so...
> But the damage done to physics, to the minds of the children, to sanity, to true understanding, is enormous.
> How many generation must pass before the crap wears off?
> How many thousands of years had to pass before the old Greek idea of the elements 'earth, fire and water make up everything'
> was replaced by modern science? How many years before the earth was no longer considered flat?
> And will we have enough time?
> Humanity will have to drop Einsteinian insanity, if it wants to reach for the stars, and spread among the galaxies.
>
> Or else, perhaps Mosquitos, they has mosquito larvae on the outside of the ISS, those survived low temperatures, high temperatures,
> vacuum, radiation, for month...
> So humanity could well go the way of the Dinosaurs, and will mosquitos rule the cosmos?
> Maybe they already do, and just think we are some primitive lifeforms....
> Can you blame them after them seeing us chant Einstein?

True intelligence is survival.  Humanity as we know it is not going to
sufficient mutate in order to survive for long, perhaps not hardly a
picosecond in the cosmic day of such matters.

 ~ BG