Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/
Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
When Einstein developed his Relativity theories which are mutually exclusive he completely ignored the reality of waves, energy, light and a medium (in 1905 he dropped the aether and gravity, spacetime was flat & uncurved; in 1915 he added back an amorphous aether and curved spacetime to account for gravitational waves; the speed of ‘science’, it is agile). The image below is a visual breakdown of electromagnetic wave propagation and antenna polarisation, illustrating how radio waves travel through space (an aether) and how their physical orientation is tied to the transmitter emitting them. This is rarely taught but puts the lie to much of ‘The Science’ not to mention NASA’s movies. We will tie this into the aether near the end of the post.
We have discussed this elsewhere in a few posts. More here
Based on real world data, the fraud called Einstein was forced back to at least some concept of an aether, but one that was amorphous enough to satisfy his pet ideologies, namely the flat-merged-space time of Special Relativity (1905); and the curved-space-time of General Theory of Relativity (1915). Notice that the ‘4D’ universe goes from flat to curved in 10 years. JWST observational data confirms it is flat and not expanding (future post on the hysterical-tortured maths they use to claim expansion).
Einstein’s philosophy, now the platform for modern physics and cosmology, meant that the aether was largely massless without particles, and immobile. This entailed it could not be a transmission or transduction agent - as false as a fighting sword made from paper and just as useless.
In 1923, Arthur Eddington, one of Einstein’s disciples, summarised the incoherency of the Relativity cult and its approach:
“If a substantial aether analogous to a material ocean exists, it must rigidify, as it were, a definite space; and whether the observer or whether nature pays any attention to that space or not, a fundamental separation of space and time must be there. Some would cut the knot by denying the aether altogether. We do not consider that desirable, or, so far as we can see, possible; but we do deny that the aether need have such properties as to separate space and time in the way supposed.”
Thanks Arthur. As a Relativist he admitted that space and time are not merged and the aether is real but for the sake of theory, let’s ignore it. The aether exists as an immobile or rigid medium (as Descartes believed), yet the leader of the Relativity cult (Einstotle) admitted that the aether might indeed be mobile and might indeed possess physical properties.
So, this is what passes for ‘The Science’. A melange of mish-mash, half baked ideas, endless changes, opinions, open-ended malleable equations, mutilated maths driven and shaped by philosophical need and imperative. Packaged and marketed as divine truth. No need for mechanical engineering or common sense. Try pouring water into a nothingness.
More here
Mach’s foundational 1883 work, The Science of Mechanics, attacked the 19th century ‘scientific’ establishment's unprovable metaphysics. Mach wrote, "No one is competent to predicate things about absolute space and absolute motion; they are pure things of thought, pure mental constructs, that cannot be produced in experience."
Mach is saying that Newtonianism is philosophy not ‘science’. It is entirely unproven and not mechanically evidenced. Mach’s view of the universe is the contrary to that of Saint Newton’s.
Newton: Newton believed space was a real, rigid, physical entity, basically an empty room. In Newton’s water-bucket experiment (link below this section analysing why this is wrong); if we spin a bucket of water hanging from the tree limb, the water climbs up the walls of the bucket due to its rotation ‘relative’ to that absolute, fixed room.
In this experiment the word ‘inertia’ indicates an object's resistance to changing speed relative to space itself. Inertia references an object at rest, or, an object going in the same direction at the same speed (no acceleration, no deceleration). Newton’s maths only work with inertial frames. Compare this to Mach.
Mach: For the Austrian "empty space" is an unprovable abstraction. If God, the ‘Universe’, or Einstein deleted every star, planet, and atom from the universe except for one bucket of water, "rotation" loses all meaning. There is nothing to rotate relative to. Therefore, the water does not climb the sides of the bucket, and you would never feel dizzy if you were spun around.
Einstein agreed with Mach and picked up the theme that knowledge and data interpretation is ‘Relative’ and applied this ‘axiom’ to Saint Isaac of Gravity and his mechanics. It was Messiah Einstein who minted the phrase, "Mach’s Principle" to argue that “local inertia is merely an interaction with the rest of the universe's matter”.
So here we have 2 worldviews: Newton’s absolute space (an empty room) and objects measured against that absolute background; and Mach who maintains that physical relationships must be ‘Relative’ and premised on many variables. More here.