10 discoveries that prove Einstein was right about the universe — and 1 that proves him wrong

Mar 14, 2023
7
1
35
Visit site
Perhaps "we" are not reading Einstein's objection closely enough. He rejected, specifically, ACTION at a distance. Entanglement does not show this. It shows the measurements at a distance are correlated, and that is very different.

This specifically does NOT allow you to alter the spin of one, thereby altering the spin of the distant entangled particle.

Ergo communication using entangled particles is NOT possible, and there is indeed no spooky action at a distance.

Please correct me if I am wrong, because this is key to the whole concept and it also debunks the key point in the article (not that it matters too much) because it does not disprove Einstein's statement.
 
Feb 9, 2023
97
1
100
Visit site
The texts below imply that, if the speed of light is VARIABLE (it is!), modern physics, predicated on Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light falsehood, is long dead (exists in a zombie state):

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

"If there's one thing every schoolboy knows about Einstein and his theory of relativity, it is that the speed of light in vacuum is constant. No matter what the circumstances, light in vacuum travels at the same speed...The speed of light is the very keystone of physics, the seemingly sure foundation upon which every modern cosmological theory is built, the yardstick by which everything in the universe is measured...The constancy of the speed of light has been woven into the very fabric of physics, into the way physics equations are written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics." https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed


Assume that a light source emits equidistant pulses and an observer starts moving towards the source:

View: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE


The speed of the light pulses relative to the stationary observer is

c = df

where d is the distance between subsequent pulses and f is the frequency at the stationary observer. The speed of the pulses relative to the moving observer is

c'= df' > c

where f' > f is the frequency at the moving observer.

That is, the speed of light relative to the observer VARIES with the speed of the observer.
 
Last edited:
The texts below imply that, if the speed of light is VARIABLE (it is!), modern physics, predicated on Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light falsehood, is long dead (exists in a zombie state):

"He opened by explaining how Einstein's theory of relativity is the foundation of every other theory in modern physics and that the assumption that the speed of light is constant is the foundation of that theory. Thus a constant speed of light is embedded in all of modern physics and to propose a varying speed of light (VSL) is worse than swearing! It is like proposing a language without vowels." http://www.thegreatdebate.org.uk/VSLRevPrnt.html

"If there's one thing every schoolboy knows about Einstein and his theory of relativity, it is that the speed of light in vacuum is constant. No matter what the circumstances, light in vacuum travels at the same speed...The speed of light is the very keystone of physics, the seemingly sure foundation upon which every modern cosmological theory is built, the yardstick by which everything in the universe is measured...The constancy of the speed of light has been woven into the very fabric of physics, into the way physics equations are written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the vocabulary of physics." https://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Speed-Light-Speculation/dp/0738205257

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light...So we had to find ways to change the speed of light without wrecking the whole thing too much." https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8q87gk/light-speed-slowed


Assume that a light source emits equidistant pulses and an observer starts moving towards the source:

View: https://youtube.com/watch?v=bg7O4rtlwEE


The speed of the light pulses relative to the stationary observer is

c = df

where d is the distance between subsequent pulses and f is the frequency at the stationary observer. The speed of the pulses relative to the moving observer is

c'= df' > c
"
where f' > f is the frequency at the moving observer.

That is, the speed of light relative to the observer VARIES with the speed of the observer.
You didn't take into account that d changes relative to the moving observer, too.

The actual expression is λf = c, where λ is the standard symbol for wavelength—"the distance between subsequent pulses."

λf = c is always true, because if f increases because of motion, λ decreases because of that same motion; if f decreases, λ increases for the same reason.

Every observer measures the speed of light as the same value: 299,792,458 m/s (meters per second).

Frequency is frequently symbolized by the Greek letter "ν" ("nu"—transliterated into the Latin alphabet as "n"), so the expression is often seen as λν = c.

Whether the cause is motion, gravity, or the expansion of spacetime, λν = λf = df = c.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pearlman YeC
Feb 9, 2023
97
1
100
Visit site
You didn't take into account that d changes relative to the moving observer, too.

What causes it to change? The cosmic conspiracy of the highest order?

Neil deGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries, pp. 123-124: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is a COSMIC CONSPIRACY OF THE HIGHEST ORDER." https://www.amazon.com/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-Quandaries/dp/039335038X
 
Feb 12, 2023
4
0
10
Visit site
On the big picture Einstein WAS also right prior to 'premature capitulation to Hubble' right about the universe in equilibrium (expansion vs contraction). His biggest blunder was throwing in the towel too early.
reference 'Einstein's Doubt' and biggest regret in Pearlman YeC for the alignment of Torah testimony, science and ancient civ. volume II SPIRAL cosmological redshift hypothesis and model.