Papyrus at Twillight, 21/12/2016
New Evidence Has Been Found: General Relativity Was Totally Wrong
New Release:
Teknik dan Taktik Pemadaman
Kebakaran (Lengkap)
26 Desember 2016
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR
New Evidence Has Been Found: General Relativity Was Totally Wrong
18 Desember 2016
HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
Teori Relativitas Umum dibangun berdasarkan gagasan Einstein tentang kesinambungan ruang-waktu, bahwa waktu adalah dimensi ke-4 yang tidak terpisahkan dengan 3 dimensi lainnya, yaitu dimensi ruang. Oleh karenanya teori relativitas umum berhubungan dengan ruang, waktu, dan struktur alam semesta secara keseluruhan.
New Release
14 November 2016
2017 SOLAR ECLIPSE PROVES EINSTEIN WRONG
".. for the stars observed being the closest to the Sun, their deviation was about 1.75 seconds of an arc." (Albert Einstein)
“….during totality on August 21, 2017 — although it will be close to midday — you’ll easily be able to see 4 planets with the unaided eye near the eclipsed sun!In order of brightness, these planets will be Venus, Jupiter, Mars and Mercury. Mars is slightly brighter than Mercury, but so nearly the same in brightness that you probably won’t notice a difference.”(See 4 planets during 2017 solar eclipse).
30 Oktober 2016
1919 ECLIPSE EXPERIMENT ERROR
"Their measurement had been sheer luck, or a case of knowing the result they wanted to get, not an uncommon occurrence in science."(Stephen Hawking).
2 September 2016
2017 ECLIPSE:CHANCE TO DOUBLE-CHECK EINSTEIN'S PROVING METHOD (EPM)
BEGINNING OF THE TOTAL SOLAR ECLIPSE WITH CORONA SURROUNDED BY IRIDESCENT CLOUDS. PHOTOGRAPHED FROM A SHIP IN POLYNESIA DURING THE JULY 22, 2009 ECLIPSE
The splendor of totality
You cannot completely prepare yourself for the sight of a total solar eclipse. When totality arrives, you will experience primal emotions and wonderment at the unspeakable beauty of the corona and the panoply of colors and light as you've never seen before. You will involuntarily scream, gasp, or perhaps cry at this astounding vision.
22 Juni 2016
MERGING BLACK HOLE DON'T BURST: JUST THE RESULT THEY WANTED TO GET
Second Gravitational Wave Makes It Official: Merging Black Holes Don't Burst!
Yesterday, the LIGO collaboration announced the detection of a pair of merging black holes, a 14 solar mass black hole inspiraling and coalescing with an 8 solar mass black hole, only the second gravitational wave event ever seen. While some controversial evidence existed that the first black hole-black hole merger produced a gamma-ray burst, those results were hotly disputed, with advocates on both sides eagerly awaiting the results from the second merger. With the announcement yesterday, it became official: neither gamma-rays nor X-rays were seen, tipping the scales towards the long-awaited conclusion, merging black holes do not produce bursts of radiation.
(FORBES.COM)
NASA detected GRB
NASA’s Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope detected the very weak and brief burst of high-energy X-rays, consistent with a short gamma-ray burst (or GRB), less than half a second after LIGO registered GW150914. This is surprising — it was assumed that when black holes collide, they do so “cleanly,” according to a NASA news release, not producing any kind of electromagnetic trace. So are the two signals related to the same event? The timing makes it highly likely; there’s only a 0.2 percent chance that they occurred in the same patch of sky at the same time but belonged to two different high-energy phenomena.
“This is a tantalizing discovery with a low chance of being a false alarm, but before we can start rewriting the textbooks we’ll need to see more bursts associated with gravitational waves from black hole mergers,” said Valerie Connaughton, member of the Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM) team at the National Space, Science and Technology Center in Huntsville, Ala.
The majority of GRBs are believed to be created when massive stars implode after running out of fuel and then explode, forming black holes in their wake. These are known as “long GRBs.” The intense radiation — detected as a flash of gamma-rays and high-energy X-rays — originates from dying stars’ poles at the time of explosion. There is, however, a more mysterious type of GRB that is short period (less than 2 seconds) and possibly linked with black hole and neutron star mergers.
“With just one joint event, gamma rays and gravitational waves together will tell us exactly what causes a short GRB,” said Lindy Blackburn, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass., and a member of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration. “There is an incredible synergy between the two observations, with gamma rays revealing details about the source’s energetics and local environment and gravitational waves providing a unique probe of the dynamics leading up to the event.”
The gravitational wave signal was generated by the rapid spiraling and collision of two black holes, an event that created the now-famous black hole “chirp.” But if indeed this Fermi detection is also of the same event, astrophysicists will have to figure out how this is possible. Black hole mergers aren’t supposed to generate significant quantities of energy in the electromagnetic spectrum unless there’s a quantity of gas close to the merging region. But it is thought that the vast majority of any gases surrounding the black hole binary would have disappeared long ago.
“This is a tantalizing discovery with a low chance of being a false alarm, but before we can start rewriting the textbooks we’ll need to see more bursts associated with gravitational waves from black hole mergers,” said Valerie Connaughton, member of the Gamma-ray Burst Monitor (GBM) team at the National Space, Science and Technology Center in Huntsville, Ala.
The majority of GRBs are believed to be created when massive stars implode after running out of fuel and then explode, forming black holes in their wake. These are known as “long GRBs.” The intense radiation — detected as a flash of gamma-rays and high-energy X-rays — originates from dying stars’ poles at the time of explosion. There is, however, a more mysterious type of GRB that is short period (less than 2 seconds) and possibly linked with black hole and neutron star mergers.
“With just one joint event, gamma rays and gravitational waves together will tell us exactly what causes a short GRB,” said Lindy Blackburn, a postdoctoral fellow at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass., and a member of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration. “There is an incredible synergy between the two observations, with gamma rays revealing details about the source’s energetics and local environment and gravitational waves providing a unique probe of the dynamics leading up to the event.”
The gravitational wave signal was generated by the rapid spiraling and collision of two black holes, an event that created the now-famous black hole “chirp.” But if indeed this Fermi detection is also of the same event, astrophysicists will have to figure out how this is possible. Black hole mergers aren’t supposed to generate significant quantities of energy in the electromagnetic spectrum unless there’s a quantity of gas close to the merging region. But it is thought that the vast majority of any gases surrounding the black hole binary would have disappeared long ago.
Sorry!
Now we know, no doubt: general relativity has been wrong since the beginning, so:
Now we know, no doubt: general relativity has been wrong since the beginning, so:
LIGO's merging black holes don't burst, sorry, just experiment is made based on belief. It is seem nothing more than a case of knowing the result they wanted to get, and in accordance with LIGO's expert that said before - in Feruary 2016 : " I am certain, Einstein has always been right."
Einstein never predicts black hole, moreover, gravitational wave come from black holes merger. He didn’t believe in black hole. Einstein is The Reluctant Father of Black Hole.
In Einstein’s manuscript 1916 :”Two celestial bodies in orbit will generate ripples in spacetime”.LIGO’s gravitational waves nothing to do with Einstein.
Two celestial bodies in orbit will generate ripples in space time yet to be proven.
What's wrong with general relativity?
Stop experiments based on belief and saying Einstein was right again. It was very embarrassing!
No doubt, general relativity has been wrong since the beginning.
21 Juni 2016
LIGO's SECOND BLACK HOLE MERGER: MISLED BY GENERAL RELATIVITY
Einstein never predicts gravitational wave come from two black holes merger. He didn’t believe in black hole. Einstein is The Reluctant Father of Black Hole. In Einstein’s manuscript 1916 :”Two celestial bodies in orbit will generate ripples in spacetime”.LIGO’s gravitational waves nothing to do with Einstein.Two celestial bodies in orbit will generate ripples in space time yet to be proven. LIGO doesn’t confirm Albert Einstein’s general relativity.
Einstein’s manuscript 1916 :”Two celestial bodies in orbit will generate ripples in spacetime”
For only the second time in human history, gravitational waves have been directly detected. This time, the merger of two lower mass black holes, of 14 and 8 solar masses, inspiraling and coalescing together, left a signal of 27 orbits spanning more than a second in both twin LIGO detectors, a second unambiguous signal in less than four months’ time.
On September 14, 2015, less than 72 hours after beginning operations, the Advanced LIGO detectors in Washington and Louisiana shocked the world by detecting two large black holes — 36 and 29 solar masses — merging together. The ripples propagating through space were so intense that even from over a billion light years away, the tiny mirrors in the LIGO apparatus shifted by thousandths of the width of a proton, vibrating back and forth ever so slightly over the span of perhaps 200 milliseconds. After months of checking their results, they made the indisputable claim: they had detected gravitational waves for the first time. 101 years after Einstein’s general theory of relativity was proposed, it passed with flying colors its most delicate, intricate test.
The experiment of LIGO has not verified the Einstein’s theory of gravity.
Where Was the Source of Gravitational Waves? According to normal pressures of experiments, we should determine or observe the event of binary black hole merger which really happened in space by some methods at first. For example, the experiment observed optical after glow caused by the material around black holes in merger process. Suppose the speed of gravitational wave is the same as that of light. When the light reached the earth, gravitational waves also arrived and caused stripe changes in interferometers.
The problem was, did LIGO really observe binary black hole merger? The authors read the PRL paper of LIGO but find no word to say they had observed astronomical phenomena about binary black hole merger. They used the method of backward to deduce the event. Based on the signs detected in laser interferometers and the Einstein’s theory of gravity, by fitting them with computer, LIGO declared that the event happened in a distance galaxy 1.3 billion years ago.
Therefore, so-called binary black hole merger is only the result of computer simulation, rather than a really observed event in astronomy and physics. By using so-called matching filter method, LIGO declared to find gravitational waves and binary black hole merger from their waveform library which had been established in advance, rather than find them from sky.
According to the interpretation of LIGO, the experiments verified the gravitational wave theory of Einstein. However, what they observed were only two signs in laser interferometers, without really observing binary black hole merger and 3 solar mass being transformed into gravitational waves, how could they say that the gravitational wave theory of Einstein was verified?(http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2016062014272089.pdf)
Where Was the Source of Gravitational Waves? According to normal pressures of experiments, we should determine or observe the event of binary black hole merger which really happened in space by some methods at first. For example, the experiment observed optical after glow caused by the material around black holes in merger process. Suppose the speed of gravitational wave is the same as that of light. When the light reached the earth, gravitational waves also arrived and caused stripe changes in interferometers.
The problem was, did LIGO really observe binary black hole merger? The authors read the PRL paper of LIGO but find no word to say they had observed astronomical phenomena about binary black hole merger. They used the method of backward to deduce the event. Based on the signs detected in laser interferometers and the Einstein’s theory of gravity, by fitting them with computer, LIGO declared that the event happened in a distance galaxy 1.3 billion years ago.
Therefore, so-called binary black hole merger is only the result of computer simulation, rather than a really observed event in astronomy and physics. By using so-called matching filter method, LIGO declared to find gravitational waves and binary black hole merger from their waveform library which had been established in advance, rather than find them from sky.
According to the interpretation of LIGO, the experiments verified the gravitational wave theory of Einstein. However, what they observed were only two signs in laser interferometers, without really observing binary black hole merger and 3 solar mass being transformed into gravitational waves, how could they say that the gravitational wave theory of Einstein was verified?(http://file.scirp.org/pdf/JMP_2016062014272089.pdf)
More than 100 years physicists around the world being misled by general relatity !
More than 100 years being misled by general relatity and just live in the world of experiments. Until now we still use Newton’s law of gravity, so far. Black holes and gravitatinal waves do not exist. Einstein’s gravity is nothing about force, it means nothing about energy …..
The problems of general relativity arise when you look at the Universe at very small or at very large scales. So, what’s wrong with general relativity?
In fact, first, general relativity is made based on thought experiment, not the real experiment. Secondly, Einstein’s thought experiments are incomprehensive, illogical, and misleading. Third, Einstein never proved general relativity. Fourth, Einstein ignored the refraction of light and the existing of celestial sphere, that’s why Einstein proposed the test for his hypothesis deflection of light by the Sun isn’t scientific and deeply wrong. Einstein’s proving method need to be examined more thoroughly and need to be taken seriously.
Every hypothesis should first be able to explain the experimental results in order to be taken seriously. But, what if the proving method of a hypothesis is not scientific but not to be taken seriously, althought the first experimental results was error? That is occur in the case of Einstein’s provng method for ‘ The Deflection of Light by the Sun ‘.
Reliable source:
“Einstein proposed therefore, that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time.” (LincolnBarnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, London, June 1949, Preface by Albert Einstein Himself, page 78).
The celestial sphere is only applicable at a certain time and at a certain place on which such observation is performed. In scientific exposure of astronomy, the instant observation applies. It means, ‘that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time ‘ isn’t scientific and deeply wrong.
General relativity has been wrong since the beginning. Deflection of light caused by refraction: i.e.astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction, not gravity.
Actually error in the famous eclipse experiment of 1919, but F.W.Dyson writes: “It seems clear that the effect found must be attributed to the Sun’s gravitational field and not, for example, to the refraction by coronal matter” (F.W.Dyson, F.R.S, A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations made at the Total Eclipse of May 29, 1919).
Nobel Committe in 1921 know about this error, that’s why Einstein never received Nobel Prize for relativity.
The new finding about Einstein’s proving method that isn’t scientific and ignored refraction of light, in accordance with— by coincidence — the invention of Professor R. C. Gupta, India, on his paper ‘Bending of Light Near a Star and Gravitational Red/Blue Shift: Alternative Explanation Based on Refraction of Light.'
The problems of general relativity arise when you look at the Universe at very small or at very large scales. So, what’s wrong with general relativity?
In fact, first, general relativity is made based on thought experiment, not the real experiment. Secondly, Einstein’s thought experiments are incomprehensive, illogical, and misleading. Third, Einstein never proved general relativity. Fourth, Einstein ignored the refraction of light and the existing of celestial sphere, that’s why Einstein proposed the test for his hypothesis deflection of light by the Sun isn’t scientific and deeply wrong. Einstein’s proving method need to be examined more thoroughly and need to be taken seriously.
Every hypothesis should first be able to explain the experimental results in order to be taken seriously. But, what if the proving method of a hypothesis is not scientific but not to be taken seriously, althought the first experimental results was error? That is occur in the case of Einstein’s provng method for ‘ The Deflection of Light by the Sun ‘.
Reliable source:
“Einstein proposed therefore, that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time.” (LincolnBarnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, London, June 1949, Preface by Albert Einstein Himself, page 78).
The celestial sphere is only applicable at a certain time and at a certain place on which such observation is performed. In scientific exposure of astronomy, the instant observation applies. It means, ‘that photographs be taken of the stars immediately bordering the darkened face of the sun during an eclipse and compared with photographs of those same stars made at another time ‘ isn’t scientific and deeply wrong.
General relativity has been wrong since the beginning. Deflection of light caused by refraction: i.e.astronomical refraction and terrestrial refraction, not gravity.
Actually error in the famous eclipse experiment of 1919, but F.W.Dyson writes: “It seems clear that the effect found must be attributed to the Sun’s gravitational field and not, for example, to the refraction by coronal matter” (F.W.Dyson, F.R.S, A Determination of the Deflection of Light by the Sun’s Gravitational Field, from Observations made at the Total Eclipse of May 29, 1919).
Nobel Committe in 1921 know about this error, that’s why Einstein never received Nobel Prize for relativity.
The new finding about Einstein’s proving method that isn’t scientific and ignored refraction of light, in accordance with— by coincidence — the invention of Professor R. C. Gupta, India, on his paper ‘Bending of Light Near a Star and Gravitational Red/Blue Shift: Alternative Explanation Based on Refraction of Light.'
14 Juni 2016
WHAT'S WRONG WITH GENERAL RELATIVITY?
I heartily recommend this book, and please stop saying Einstein was right again
PROBLEMS OF GRAVITY
By
Marianne Freiberger
PlusMathsOrg, July 23, 2014
Albert Einstein is an icon and for good reason. His general theory of relativity, which describes the force of gravity, was an intellectual tour de force. Not only were his ideas entirely new, they have also stood the test of time. Despite this success, some physicists are doing what many would consider sacrilege: they are tinkering with the theory, producing modified versions of it. But why?
22 Mei 2016
GRAVITATIONAL REDSHIFT/BLUESHIFT IS INDOSHIFT, IT IS CAUSED BY REFRACTION
Redshift
caused by refraction, not gravity
It is quite clear that deflection of starlight caused by refraction, not gravity. The term of gravitational redshift as we know is the term in the frame deflection of starlight by the Sun or light bending by gravity field of massive object.
15 Mei 2016
TIME DILATION BY AIR DENSITY, NOT GRAVITY
: DOUBLE-CHECK OF HAFELE-KEATING EXPERIMENT 1971
Clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface.
It is not caused by gravity, but by air density of atmosphere. Closer to
the earth surface, the air is denser compared to the density of the air
layer above it. The density is getting looser or weaker when it is
getting higher.
Tentu saja, pesawatnya juga bergerak lebih cepat!
Tentu saja, pesawatnya juga bergerak lebih cepat!
The atmosphere of Earth is the layer of gases, commonly known as air, that surrounds the planet Earth and is retained by Earth's gravity. The atmosphere protects life on Earth by absorbing ultraviolet solar radiation, warming the surface through heat retention (greenhouse effect), and reducing temperature extremes between day and night (the diurnal temperature variation).
By volume, dry air contains 78.09% nitrogen, 20.95% oxygen,0.93% argon, 0.039% carbon dioxide, and small amounts of other gases. Air also contains a variable amount of water vapor, on average around 1% at sea level, and 0.4% over the entire atmosphere. Air content and atmospheric pressure vary at different layers, and air suitable for use in photosynthesis by terrestrial plants and breathing of terrestrial animals is found only in Earth's troposphere and in artificial atmospheres.
The atmosphere has a mass of about 5.15×1018 kg, three quarters of which is within about 11 km (6.8 mi; 36,000 ft) of the surface. The atmosphere becomes thinner and thinner with increasing altitude, with no definite boundary between the atmosphere and outer space. The Kármán line, at 100 km (62 mi), or 1.57% of Earth's radius, is often used as the border between the atmosphere and outer space. Atmospheric effects become noticeable during atmospheric reentry of spacecraft at an altitude of around 120 km (75 mi). Several layers can be distinguished in the atmosphere, based on characteristics such as temperature and composition.
(wikipedia.org)
Hafele-Keating Experiment in 1971
The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity.
General relativity predicts an additional effect, in which an increase in gravitational potential due to altitude speeds the clocks up. That is, clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface. This effect has been confirmed in many tests of general relativity, such as the Pound–Rebka experiment and Gravity Probe A. In the Hafele–Keating experiment, there was a slight increase in gravitational potential due to altitude that tended to speed the clocks back up. Since the aircraft flew at roughly the same altitude in both directions, this effect was approximately the same for the two planes, but nevertheless it caused a difference in comparison to the clocks on the ground.
Results
(wikipedia.Hafele-Keating)
Clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface. It is not caused by gravity, but by air density of atmosphere. Closer to the earth surface, the air is denser compared to the density of the air layer above it. The density is getting looser or weaker when it is getting higher.
Hafele-Keating Experiment in 1971
Hafele and Keating aboard a commercial airliner,
with two of the atomic clocks and a stewardess.
The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity.
General relativity predicts an additional effect, in which an increase in gravitational potential due to altitude speeds the clocks up. That is, clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface. This effect has been confirmed in many tests of general relativity, such as the Pound–Rebka experiment and Gravity Probe A. In the Hafele–Keating experiment, there was a slight increase in gravitational potential due to altitude that tended to speed the clocks back up. Since the aircraft flew at roughly the same altitude in both directions, this effect was approximately the same for the two planes, but nevertheless it caused a difference in comparison to the clocks on the ground.
Results
(wikipedia.Hafele-Keating)
Clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface. It is not caused by gravity, but by air density of atmosphere. Closer to the earth surface, the air is denser compared to the density of the air layer above it. The density is getting looser or weaker when it is getting higher.
It is has been known in traveling on an airplane. At higher altitude the density of amosphere is getting looser or weaker, and less of friction on an airplane. Traveling in weaker density of atmosphere an airplane can move faster than in denser atmosphere.
7 Mei 2016
WHAT'S WRONG WITH MEASURING THE SPEED OF GRAVITY IN 2002 ?
“What should you do when you find you have made a mistake like that? Some people never admit that they are wrong and continue to find new, and often mutually inconsistent, arguments to support their case “ (Stephen Hawking)
NewScientistCom
Isaac Newton thought the influence of gravity was instantaneous, but Einstein assumed it travelled at the speed of light and built this into his 1915 general theory of relativity.
Light-speed gravity means that if the Sun suddenly disappeared from the centre of the Solar System, the Earth would remain in orbit for about 8.3 minutes – the time it takes light to travel from the Sun to the Earth. Then, suddenly feeling no gravity, Earth would shoot off into space in a straight line.
But the assumption of light-speed gravity has come under pressure from brane world theories, which suggest there are extra spatial dimensions rolled up very small. Gravity could take a short cut through these extra dimensions and so appear to travel faster than the speed of light – without violating the equations of general relativity.
But how can you measure the speed of gravity? One way would be to detect gravitational waves, little ripples in space-time that propagate out from accelerating masses. But no one has yet managed to do this.
Kopeikin found another way. He reworked the equations of general relativity to express the gravitational field of a moving body in terms of its mass, velocity and the speed of gravity. If you could measure the gravitational field of Jupiter, while knowing its mass and velocity, you could work out the speed of gravity.
Bending waves
The opportunity to do this arose in September 2002, when Jupiter passed in front of a quasar that emits bright radio waves. Fomalont and Kopeikin combined observations from a series of radio telescopes across the Earth to measure the apparent change in the quasar’s position as the gravitational field of Jupiter bent the passing radio waves.
From that they worked out that gravity does move at the same speed as light. Their actual figure was 0.95 times light speed, but with a large error margin of plus or minus 0.25.
Their result, announced on Tuesday at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society meeting in Seattle, should help narrow down the possible number of extra dimensions and their sizes.
Bending waves
The opportunity to do this arose in September 2002, when Jupiter passed in front of a quasar that emits bright radio waves. Fomalont and Kopeikin combined observations from a series of radio telescopes across the Earth to measure the apparent change in the quasar’s position as the gravitational field of Jupiter bent the passing radio waves.
From that they worked out that gravity does move at the same speed as light. Their actual figure was 0.95 times light speed, but with a large error margin of plus or minus 0.25.
Their result, announced on Tuesday at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society meeting in Seattle, should help narrow down the possible number of extra dimensions and their sizes.
Gravitational waves are not part of the electromagnetic waves. Gravitational waves and electromagnetic waves are quite different. Measuring the speed of gravity in September 2002 by Kopeikin - radiowaves from quasar are bent by Jupiter's gravity and focused into a ring-was wrong:
1.There is no evidence radiowaves are bent by Jupiter's gravity.
2.Einstein's general theory of relativity was wrong. Light/electromagnetic waves are bent by refraction, not gravity.
3.Kopeikin’s experiment was wrong: It is Not the speed of gravity, but the propagation of radiowaves from quasar or the speed of light.
Question arise: What’s wrong with gravitational waves discovery by LIGO in 11 February 2016?
What new discoveries would have blown Einstein’s mind away if he would be transported to today’s era?
1.The Modern of Astronomy / Astronomical Navigation and the use of Nautical Almanac, can prove his special and general relativity was totally wrong, his proving method for ‘defelction of light by the Sun’ is not scientific and deeply wrong, the famous Arthur Eddington’s eclipse experiment of 1919 actually was error, and he realizes that’s why he never received Nobel Prize for his relativity.
He will realizes many of physicists make a mistake that was caused by his theory, and there are many unsolved mysteries in physycs. Many discovery in modern physics was wrong: measuring the speed of gravity, gavitational waves ..
He will realizes that he failed not only single one but three in classical tests.
2.Internet and google search can make 15 years old high school student become more genius than genius in the era of his life. (QuoraCom).
Sorry, Einstein, Kopeikin, LIGO, and all Einstein’s supporters those who said: “ I am certain, Einstein has always been right!”
1 Mei 2016
ALBERT EINSTEIN FAILED IN THREE CLASSICAL TESTS
The life time of Minkowski and his former student Albert Einstein before the modern astronomy arise. They do not understand about 'The Space and Time', namely The Celestial Sphere, one of the fundamental concepts in the modern astronomy. They knowing not about Nautical Almanac as "holy book" in science of modern astronomy, that says refraction of light of celestial bodies can not be ignored.
That is why, in Special and General Theory of Relativity Albert Einstein ignored the celestial sphere and refraction of light.
A theory of four-dimensional space–time or 4D known as the "Minkowski spacetime" was misleading. There are no 4D, but 3D +1D in Modern Astronomy: Celestial Sphere Coordinate System. Einstein general theory of relativity was totally wrong.(GSA)
“Einstein’s Law of Gravitation contains nothing about force. It describes the behaviour of objects in a gravitational field – the planets, for example – not in terms of ‘ attraction ‘ but simply in terms of the paths they follow. To Einstein, gravitation is simple part of inertia; the movement of the stars and the planets arise from their inherent inertia; and the courses they follow are determined by the metric properties of space – or, more properly speaking, the metric properties of the space-time continuum “ (Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, London, June 1949, page 72 ).
26 April 2016
THEORY OF THE VERY BEGINNING UNIVERSE BEFORE BIG BANG
By 1930, other cosmologists, including Eddington, Willem de Sitter, and Einstein, had concluded that the static (non-evolving) models of the universe they had worked on for many years were unsatisfactory. Furthermore, Edwin Hubble, using the world’s largest telescope at Mt. Wilson in California, had shown that the distant galaxies all appeared to be receding from us at speeds proportional to their distances. It was at this point that Lemaître drew Eddington’s attention to his earlier work, in which he had derived and explained the relation between the distance and the recession velocity of galaxies. Eddington at once called the attention of other cosmologists to Lemaître’s 1927 paper and arranged for the publication of an English translation. Together with Hubble’s observations, Lemaître’s paper convinced the majority of astronomers that the universe was indeed expanding, and this revolutionized the study of cosmology.
A year later, Lemaître explored the logical consequences of an expanding universe and boldly proposed that it must have originated at a finite point in time. If the universe is expanding, he reasoned, it was smaller in the past, and extrapolation back in time should lead to an epoch when all the matter in the universe was packed together in an extremely dense state. Appealing to the new quantum theory of matter, Lemaître argued that the physical universe was initially a single particle—the “primeval atom” as he called it—which disintegrated in an explosion, giving rise to space and time and the expansion of the universe that continues to this day. This idea marked the birth of what we now know as Big Bang cosmology. (George Lemaitre)
Theory of The Very Beginning Universe Before Big Bang
is the theory of Blank, Empty, like the secret in the story of Kung Fu Panda, and everything in the world is vibration.
Professor Ethan Siegel:The Biggest Question About The Beginning of Universe
George Lemaitre's primeval atom, where does it come from?
George Lemaitre's primeval atom, where does it come from?
20 April 2016
EKSPERIMEN IMAJINER TIDAK LOGIS DAN BISA MENYESATKAN
Albert Einstein dikenal sangat pandai membuat eksprimen pikiran atau eksperimen imajiner (Thought experiments), dan pertama kali membaca eksperimen imajinernya, orang pasti terkesan, atau mungkin tidak langsung mengerti karena untuk memahaminya kita 'dipaksa' untuk berpikir. Dua atau tiga kali membacanya barangkali kita baru paham apa yang dimaksud atau tujuannya.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
