Relativity and the 'Photon Clock' fraud. Another 'mind experiment' pretending to be relevant.
The Relativity cult relies on 'mind experiments', complex, rather inane maths; and the word salads to impress, dazzle and amaze.
Einstein himself admitted to an unlimited celestial light-speed ten years after he claimed it was constant.
The ‘greatest scientist evah’ wrote:
“In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity.
A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust. But in reality this is not the case.
We can only conclude that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of validity; its results hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g., of light).”
Albert Einstein, Relativity: The Special and the General Theory, translation by Robert W. Lawson, 1961, p. 85.
In the quote above, the Einstotle says that the key postulate upon which the Special Theory of Relativity (STR) is based is wrong, but that is okay. It just proves that STR is valid though not infallible nor infinite! Doesn’t everyone wish that their philosophy or theory, no matter the objective evidence or proof, is valid and a ‘law’ that others must follow. We discussed in many posts why Einstein knew that light speed was variant.
Philosophical Postulates
When Einstein formulated STR in 1905, he based it on two postulates both of which are wrong:
1) The laws of physics remain the same in all inertial frames of reference.
2) The speed of light in a vacuum is a universal constant.
This substack has discussed why both are rubbish. Einstein knew that light speed was inconstant but such variability leads ineluctably to an aether which he, for no good scientific reason, jettisoned and the destruction of his (tautological) maths. Light is now assumed to be particles traveling in a wave. Einstein did not believe this. His theory was more Newtonian based on ‘corpuscles’ or light particles in movement. STR does not consider waves. Bell’s theorem discussed here, outlines why light waves disprove STR.
Let’s also consider his ‘first postulate’ or that ‘The laws of physics remain the same in all inertial frames of reference’ and understand what it actually states. Inertial is defined as static, not-changing, or moving without acceleration.
Experiment: Take 4 people and seat them around a card table on a moving train (this is a favourite ‘mind experiment’ used by ‘The Science’). Seat another 4 people around a second table on the platform who are also playing cards.
Observation: There seems to be no ‘relative’ difference between this situation and 4 people playing cards on the train platform.
If an independent observer viewed the 2 tables of card players, this observer would not notice a difference, even though the train was moving (inertial not changing, even though it is moving).
According to the Einstein cult the ‘laws of physics’ (whatever those might be), are the ‘same’ for all involved. Relativity is proven yet again!
Problem: These ‘mind experiments’ are simplistic given they do not present real scenarios that differentiate between solids, waves and other real physical phenomena. If we introduce sound, radio waves, moving objects, a rolling ball, a swinging lantern, then the first postulate is simply invalidated and does not hold. The laws of solids, mediums, sounds and fungible light transmission clearly mean that the ‘laws of physics’ are different depending on the ‘observers’, the medium, the aether, and the motions and masses used within the ‘reference frame’.
For example, STR rejects that the motion of an observer has an impact on light speed and the calcuation of distance to the source. This is inane. Of course the observer’s speed is fundamental in such calculations!
If we take the above thought experiment and move the observer around at different rates and trajectories, both within the train cabin and on the platform, and we introduce into both environments sound (a radio), a lantern (light) and a rolling ball, then the laws of physics and their calculations of events around those 2 tables are quite variable and variegated. Einstein’s first postulate does not hold up against common sense.
Maxwell’s magnetism
Postulates 1 and 2 above can be disproven through a uniform objection. If we understand that light has many frequences, wave-lengths and is a part, and just one part of the electro-magnetic spectrum, then we don’t need STR. Einstein knew that light has other ‘properties’ yet he never discussed them. We discussed how Einstein mangled Maxwell’s equations on electromagnetism for his own purposes.
The reality is that Maxwell utilised a wave equation to describe electromagnetic radiation. But in STR, light is treated as a particle-solid!
Why did the Scot, using Huygens and others who proposed a wave theory of light, base his theories on this concept, when others such as Newton had a different view? Why not ‘corpuscles’ or ‘particles’? The answer is that using his own eyes, Maxwell could see that light follows the inverse square law of dispersion.
This means that if light travels a linear distance of 500 miles, it would spread out according to the square of that distance and its intensity would also vary inversely with the square of the linear distance it had travelled. This is what we see and what our common sense tells us should happen.
This is the exact opposite to what Einstein and Galileo proposed (Einsteinian Relativity is similar to what Galileo developed).
If light did indeed obey Galilean transformations there would be no way in which it could disperse as a wave according to the inverse square law.
Let there be light
Why did the Einstotle do this? He believed (wrongly) that Max Planck had proved beyond any reasonable doubt that light (energy) is delivered as tiny discrete individual packets of energy that he called quanta, rather than as a continuous flow of energy as had been previously believed. Planck felt that these packets of energy could (because of their attribute as particles), be subject to Galilean transformations. It is wrong of course.
Ask yourself – ‘where can these light particles be found?’
Light photons are never at rest and always have a mass (which Relativity denies). This is one reason why E=Mc2 is wrong. A particle with zero mass does not exist and cannot obey Galilean transformations. These particles do have a mass, and they do travel in waves. Depending on the medium (eg a prism), light will travel at a uniform speed regardless of the frequency which means that light is not a solid and cannot obey Galilean-STR transformation. Wave frequency does not affect wave speed.
Game, set, match.
The Photon Clock as ‘proof’
We finally get the main theme of the post. We have discussed 3 proofs used by ‘The Science’ for Relativity, all of which are false: mercury’s perihelion, light aberration, and related to that, ‘gravitational lensing’. There is a fourth, which is sometimes used and is just as ridiculous as the other 3, namely, the ‘photon clock experiment’.
Back to the trains and ‘mind experiments’. The photon clock ‘mind experiment’ consists of a coach in a train whose interior is equipped with mirrors on the floor and the roof
· A beam of light shines from the mirror on the floor to the mirror on the roof and is reflected back
· One whole reflection, from the floor to the roof and back again, is taken as one tick of the clock (assumed to be 1 second)
· Observer A, let’s call her ‘Alice’, is sitting in the coach with the photon clock and observing the light transfer from floor to roof and back again
· Her friend Observer B, named ‘Bob’, is standing on the train platform and is watching Alice’s carriage
o Assumption 1: the carriage or coach has glass walls
o Assumption 2: the speed of the photon clock light beam assumes the velocity of the train (this is embedded in Galilean-Einsteinian Relativity)
· For Observer A, or Alice who is in the carriage, the beam of light appears to go straight up and down in the carriage
· For Bob, who is standing on the platform, the beam of light in the carriage as the train passes by, will travel a longer distance
· Result: Observer Alice, in the train carriage is measuring one length that the beam in the photon clock travels, while Bob on the platform watching the clock perform the same identical up and down journey, measures a much longer length over which the beam travels. For the cult this ‘proves’ Relativity! All hail!
How can the 2 observers calculate a different light distance from the photon clock? Supposedly the Einstotle’s maths reveal the mystery. The real answer is that what is happening here is not relevant at all. This mind experiment is rubbish.
The implicit assumption that light would assume the velocity of the train would only be true for a solid object.
We know that light is not a solid object.
If Alice was pinging a ball in the carriage and bouncing it up and down, then yes, the ball does acquire the momentum of that train. This is a pure Galilean transformation which the Einstotle copied. This can be physically validated.
The opposite is simply not true. Waves do not acquire the speed of the object!
Therefore we can state: the speed of light will always be independent of any vehicle it is travelling on, and subject to its properties and the medium. This is not what STR proposes. Relativity is therefore wrong.
Or, even if you believe that the speed of light and sound are invariant, STR is still disproven because neither light waves, nor sound, is a solid. Consider sound.
Jet aircraft can break the ‘sound barrier’ only because the speed of sound does not follow Galilean-Einsteinian transformations! If sound were travelling with the same velocity as the plane how could the plane go faster than the sound? It is not possible; it would be like trying to pull yourself up by your own socks. Light operates the same way.
Bottom Line
Since the development of relativity in 1905 all theories involving the aether have fallen out of favour. The aether does exist and Einstein is wrong. Physicists and practictioners in the past including Newton, Lorentz, Poincare, Maxwell and Tesla, believed that electromagnetic waves needed an aether or medium to propagate through space. STR rejected the aether and imposed an incorrect philosophical framework on ‘Science’ including:
· Light and sound are solids
· The aether or medium does not affect light speed
· Galilean transformations mean that light within a medium or ‘reference’ grid assumes the velocity of the object
· The ‘laws of physics’ whatever that may mean, are exactly the same in all ‘reference grids’
All are wrong.
In this post we discussed why the photon clock does not prove STR. A beam of light does not acquire the velocity of a train. This is fundamentally unscientific and incorrect and means that Einstein’s Relativity is untenable. If we view the ‘photon clock’ from a mathematical viewpoint we can see that assuming both the speed of light and the speed of light squared as a unity in the Lorentz factor, makes the whole exercise pointless.
In summary the ‘photon clock’ is just another useless ‘mind experiment’ which is used to confuse and confound and upend your common sense.
All hail.
References
1) Einstein’s Mirror Tony Hey and Patrick Walters, Cambridge University Press. 1997
2) Comparing Aether with the particle model, David de Hilster, Natural Philosophy Society
3) Aether Light the fact of everything, Randy Lee Holmes, xlibris.com
4) A Gestalt Aether Theory on the Nature of Light and Related Phenomena., Dilip D James, Educreation Publishers New Delhi 2016
He had massive institutional support from the get go, plucked from obscurity and transformed into the embodiment of genius. There are reports that he was involved in elite DC sex parties where blackmail was a currency. I think Einstein was a careful crafted operation to encourage relativity in all forms and to put a box around humanity with concept of a speed of light limit.
Why did Einstein make these particular theories up, and how did they become so influential? There's reason to believe he was sexually blackmailed and working on behalf of a network determined to control our minds. Similar things can be said of Freud, and perhaps Marx.