Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > General Conspiracy Discussion > General Conspiracy Discussion
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-21-2005, 12:32 PM
nomad nomad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 790
Default Why Einstein may have got it wrong


Here's a recent article on the Fraud

known by the name of Albert Einstein.

Not only did this flunky steal most of his

material but it is being proved to be wrong

just like Nikola Tesla has stated when

he say " You are WRONG Mr. Einstein "


----------------------------------------
Why Einstein may have got it wrong

David Adam, science correspondent
Monday April 11, 2005
The Guardian

A century after Albert Einstein published his most famous ideas, physicists will today commemorate the occasion by trying to demolish one of them.
Astronomers will tell experts gathering at Warwick University to celebrate the anniversary of the great man's "miracle year" that the speed of light - Einstein's unchanging yardstick that underpins his special theory of relativity - might be slowing down.

Michael Murphy, of the Institute of Astronomy at Cambridge University, said: "We are claiming something extraordinary here. The findings suggest there is a more fundamental theory of the way that light and matter interact; and that special relativity, at its foundation, is actually wrong."

Einstein's insistence that the speed of light was always the same set up many of his big ideas and established the bedrock of modern physics.

Dr Murphy said: "It could turn out that special relativity is a very good approximation but it's missing a little bit. That little bit may be the doorknob to a whole new universe and a whole new set of fundamental laws." His team did not measure a change in the speed of light directly. Instead, they analysed flickering light from the far-distant celestial objects called quasars.

Their light takes billions of years to travel to Earth, letting astronomers see the fundamental laws of the universe at work during its earliest days. The observations, from the massive Keck telescope in Hawaii, suggest the way certain wavelengths of light are absorbed has changed.

If true, it means that something called the fine structure constant - a measure of the strength of electromagnetic force that holds atoms together - has changed by about 0.001% since the big bang. The speed of light depends on the fine structure constant. If one varies with time then the other probably does too, meaning Einstein got it wrong.

If light moved faster in the early universe than now, physicists would have to rethink many fundamental theories. His conclusions are based on work carried out in 2001 with John Webb at the University of New South Wales in Sydney. Other astronomers disputed the findings, and a smaller study using a different telescope last year suggested no change.

Dr Murphy's team is analysing the results from the largest experiment so far, using light from 143 bright stellar objects. Einstein's burst of creativity in 1905 stunned his contemporaries. He published three papers that changed the way scientists viewed the world, including the special theory of relativity that led to his deduction E=mc˛.

The Physics2005 conference, set up by the Institute of Physics as part of its Einstein Year initiative, runs until Thursday.

__________________
:-o
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-21-2005, 01:44 PM
Draken Draken is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 896
Default Lord Kelvin's Vortex Theory of Atoms

Hey, nomad!

This is kind of a "special interest" topic but I thought I post it anyway. I read a book called <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1858600197/qid=1098463158/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8009657-8907828?v=glance&s=books">THE VORTEX - Key To Future Science by David Ash&Peter Hewitt</a>. It talks about Scottish scientist Lord Kelvin's (William Thomson) 1867 Vortex Theory of Atoms.
Supposedly, this theory was so elegant and simple - and above all, it explained the atom very well - that it was the accepted theory until Einstein came and ruined the party.

This is the website of one of the authors of that book, David Ash. He is very polite towards Einstein ;-), I suppose he's not that stupid. But he explains the basics of the theory there. I read the book The Vortex and found it very interesting and intriguing, although I have to say I reserve myself in regards to some of the things said, since I don't have the knowledge to verify their claims. Nevertheless, it's a fascinating theory.


Lord Kelvin

<a href="http://www.quantum-vortex.com/quantum_vortex/quantum_vortex_6.htm">The Quantum Vortex</a>
__________________
Three things are sacred to me: first Truth, and then, in its tracks, primordial prayer; Then virtue–nobility of soul which, in God walks on the path of beauty. Frithjof Schuon
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-21-2005, 03:08 PM
get_real get_real is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 334
Default Re: Lord Kelvin's Vortex Theory of Atoms

This is how we 'live' forever. We go on and on.
__________________
Got Truth?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-22-2005, 10:43 AM
psholtz psholtz is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 246
Default Re: Lord Kelvin's Vortex Theory of Atoms

This paper contains some wonderful explorations of just exactly what Einstein did get wrong in SR.. among other things:

(*) Time dilation probably does not occur (at least not in the way explained by Einstein);
(*) Einstein's explanation of stellar aberration is incorrect (insofar as Einstein even had an explanation for stellar aberration, which he really didn't.. it was more "hand-waving")
(*) All reference frames are not equal; all things being equal, light will still "pick out" the "most inertial" reference frame it can find, and all motions/speeds should be calculated with respect to this (inertial reference frame)

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/adring/Johnson.pdf
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Einstein vs Tesla - a good article explaining the flunky vs the true genius nomad General Conspiracy Discussion 7 06-24-2011 06:34 PM
Einstein, Cartan and Evans – Start of a New Age in Physics? SeC Opinions 0 06-17-2007 06:50 AM
Self Defence: Is it WRONG? LaDominio General Conspiracy Discussion 4 04-05-2006 07:52 PM
Einstein the Plagiarist this Alternate History 33 03-03-2005 11:35 PM
Is There an Einstein Conspiracy? rushdoony New World Order operatives 2 02-13-2005 08:21 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.