🚀 go-pugleaf

Pentcho Valev wrote:
> Eric Gisse wrote:
> > On Jul 17, 12:10 am, Pentcho Valev <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leEsz9ci5XE&mode=related&search=
>
> > > Pentcho Valev
>
> > Admit it, you enjoy posting funny shit from youtube more than whining
> > about relativity.
>
> Frankly, I am worried about your PhD studentship. Master Tom Roberts
> continues to repeat "Don't underestimate the dark side of science" but
> in his situation
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leEsz9ci5XE&mode=related&search=
>
> he will not be able to teach you properly. Try another master - I
> suggest masters that have something to do with the other Einstein:
>
http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/b892ecc3713622b8?

I am still worried about your PhD studentship (I was not able to sleep
this night) so I have another suggestion. Some time ago Master Lee
Smolin said something breathtaking:

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm "Einstein's Legacy --
Where are the "Einsteinians?", 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."

What did happen in 1907? Master John Norton will tell you what
happened:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/OntologyOUP_TimesNR.pdf "What Can
We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the Theory of
Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there is no
comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The constancy
of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect homogeneity of
spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a special velocity
at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same velocity
everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to general
relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of light.
Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Now the problem is that Master Lee Smolin says special relativity is
"WRONG". He could have said that "the special theory of relativity
cannot claim an unlimited domain of validity" as Divine Albert had
taught him:

http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html
Albert Einstein: "In the second place our result shows that, according
to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the
velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two
fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to
which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited
validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the
velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might
think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity
and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust.
But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the
special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of
validity; its result hold only so long as we are able to disregard the
influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)."

So I suggest you should become a PhD student of Master John Norton and
your PhD thesis should be entitled:

"Does the variability of the speed of light in a gravitational field
prove that special relativity is just wrong, or does it prove that the
special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of
validity?"

Nice problem isn't it? You can partially resolve it even now by
considering

http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch13.pdf pp.2-4

You should ask: What is the speed of light relative to the receiver?
Then you should obtain two results:

1. The speed of light relative to the receiver is c'=c(1+V/c^2) in the
presence of a gravitational field (this is Einstein's famous 1911
equation that Master Tom Roberts has declared wrong).

2. The speed of light relative to the receiver is c'=c+v in the
absence of a gravitational field. This last equation may make you
think that the variability of the speed of light in a gravitational
field proves that special relativity is just WRONG.

Pentcho Valev