Re: Steel Man of Einstein & Relativity.

On 09/09/2024 09:25 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 09/09/2024 09:23 AM, Ross Finlayson wrote:

On 09/08/2024 11:00 PM, rhertz wrote:

He didn´t think nothing first. Study MORE, in particular the November
1915 paper on Mercury problem.
>
FIRST AT ALL: It wasn't Einstein who thought about spacetime bending and
twisting due to heavy gravitational masses. It was Marcel Grossman, in
1913, while developing Entwurf I. Einstein didn't know shit about that
new mathematics, based on absolute differential geometry. The adoption
of such concept came MANY YEARS AFTER 1915, by the hand of many other
MATHEMATICIANS AND ROGUE PHYSICISTS.
>
Points to be made CRISTAL CLEAR:
>
1) The solution of Mercury's problem didn't involve ANY CONCEPT OF
SPACETIME. Not even the handling of Hilbert's Field Equations, which
Einstein appropriated in 1915. Such solution ELIMINATED the time
variable, as it was FIXED using gravitational potential as the 4th.
coordinate. TIME (as flowing while Mercury was orbiting was dismissed.
Instead, calculations were made over an ENTIRE REVOLUTION around the
Sun). Only at the end, the PERIOD was introduced by using the 2nd.
Kepler's Law.
>
3) The problem was managed by his proposal of a NEWTONIAN law of kinetic
+ potential energy, like it was used to calculate Newtonian orbits:
K+U=E. Once he got the analytical expression of a Newtonian orbit, he
HACKED the equation by introducing a OBSCURE MODIFICATION of the
Newtonian potential (Eq. 7c). He replaced, without any substantiation U=
-GM/r  (Newton) by U= -GM (1+L^2/r^2). This FRAUDULENT CHANGE allowed to
transform a quadratic polynomial (pure Newton) into a cubic polynomial,
in the expression of (dx/d@)^2. This trick, by solving the integral of
d@ from perihelion to aphelion, provided a small difference over PHI,
and that was all.
>
4) IN NO CASE the space bending was used, as the calculations were based
on a flat spatial orbit around the Sun, following a CLASSICAL Newtonian
approach.
>
5) All the crap about matter bending space and energy dictating how came
MANY YEARS AFTER 1915, by CORRUPT SOLD OUT SCHOLARS, who made a healthy
living by profiting about the infinite MATHEMATICAL SOLUTIONS (not
PHYSICALS) that the complexity of GR allowed. Of the hundred of
solutions found in the decades to come, almost ALL OF THEM were
dismissed, because it had no any possible physical meaning in order to
support GR.
>
BECAUSE MATHEMATICS IS NOT PHYSICS, AND GR MATHEMATICS IS A HUGE SCAM
POPULARIZED BY PEOPLE WITHOUT MORAL AND ETHICS. THEY JUST FOUND AN EASY
WAY TO MAKE A LIVING PLAYING WITH GR, CREATING FANTASY WORLDS THAT WORTH
NOTHING.
>
READ MORE AND STUDY MORE, FYLANSSON.

>
Yeah, I'll try.
>
The other day I'm reading in the World Fact Book of 1846 that Faraday
discovered a "Magnetization of Light" according to which polarization
in effect is a pretty simple table-top experiment, as in according to
something like "Faraday rotations".
>
Then the old "ether" theory is sort of wrapped as new these days as
yon "aether" theory, as with regards to the Equivalence Principle
(of acceleration motively and acceleration gravitationally) as with
regards to that it's really rather terrestrial.
>
So, we lionize Einstein and not just because of the conceptual
"Fourth Dimension" separating the strength of science from the
strength of theory so that there's hope, and besides the fact
that something like e = mc^2 is just the first term of the Taylor
series of K.E. kinetic energy, and in the surrounds of Kelvin and
Rayleigh and Young and Millikan with regards to Fresnel and Huygens
and later Broglie and Bohm, about the "success" of relativity and
the "success" of quantum mechanics, where the quotes only mean
"not unqualified", and particularly as with regards to Einstein's
later and wiser "Out of My Later Years" where he defines that in
Relativity that "SR is local" and "GR is first", while working on
what's required of the mathematical theory to provide the
super-classical extra-standard, of which he wasn't un-aware,
and even the basic notions for classical mechanics, of the
zero'eth laws as with regards to on the one side "absement"
as before displacement, and on the other, the infinitely-many
higher orders of acceleration in any change of motion, mathematically.
>
>
Then you're at your leisure to bring him down, yet only what
matters is to bring something better, up.
>
>
The other day some article was like "GR and QM unified", and
it's like, I see you've log-normaled your g-2 and slanted your bias.
>
I try learning, https://www.youtube.com/@rossfinlayson .
>
>
>

>
There's also the cosmological constant, vanishing yet non-zero,
where today's sky survey thoroughly establishes "space-time is flat",
so it's vanishing, while, there's gravity and all, so non-zero.
>
Extra-classical, super-standard, ....
>
It's broke? Fix it.
>
>

It's like, when Zeeman accepts a Nobel Prize in 1903 and talks
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1902/zeeman/lecture/
about a different configuration of experiment with regards to
the sodium lines, we know today that there are at least three
sodium lines, as after of course the great success of spectroscopy
after blackbody radiation, electron physics, the ultraviolet
catastrophe, that many avenues yet deserve exploration of course
for anything what remains today as being called an, "effect".
Like, Fraunhofer diffraction is profound. (If spelled variously.)