Sujet : LIGO's Gravitational Waves Disproved in...1887
De : pentcho.valev (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Pentcho Valev)
Groupes : fr.sci.astrophysiqueDate : 24. Aug 2022, 12:36:43
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <659a23cb-83d6-4022-ac5c-13d12cb184c5n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent : G2/1.0
Spacetime and gravitational waves (ripples in spacetime) don't exist - LIGO's "discoveries" are fakes. The reason is that the speed of light is VARIABLE AS PER NEWTON, as originally (prior to introducing the length-contraction fudge factor) proved by the Michelson-Morley experiment:
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjlq"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the results of the Michelson–Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpuscular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obeying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant emitter (c ± v)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theorySo in 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's variable speed of light, c'=c±v. The crucial question is:
Was the experiment simultaneously, in 1887, compatible with the constant speed of light, c'=c, posited by the ether theory and "borrowed" by Einstein in 1905?
The answer "yes" is too blatantly fraudulent, even by the standards of the Einstein cult, so Einsteinians don't discuss this question. Only Banesh Hoffmann did, but his implicit answer was "no":
"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage than one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not independent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to consist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contracting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen, Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms of particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced as his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roots, p.92
https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/0486406768See more here:
https://twitter.com/pentcho_valevPentcho Valev