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
Dr. J. Le Roux (1930), French mathematician, physicist, criticising Einstotle the great confusionist.
“The conclusions sometimes have no relation to the premises, the basic components of the calculations assume a meaning that does not correspond to the definition in the underlying data….it takes its own principle as the starting point…geodetic measurements in the form of quadratic differentials with four variables, through space time with four dimensions….this hypothesis contradicts gravity….my very clear conclusion is that Einsteins RTH (relativity theories) does not belong in the field of positive science.”
Indeed. Nothing in Relativity belongs in ‘positive science’. There is no physicality to Einstotle’s theorems. They are just maths games.
Beyond the mathematical garb and gibberish no one understands, we have the aether, or as the Einstotle called it in 1916, a ‘Relativistic ether’, whatever that means. Einstein had to remove the aether in 1905 to make his ‘Relative motions’ theories seem plausible. He had to reinstate something similar in 1916 to account for gravitational attraction between this planet and the Sun, or ‘spooky action at a distance’. For the record Relativity’s theories on motion have never been proven.
The aether exists and was known until Einstotle and his Relativity cult in 1905 decided to tell us that reality does not exist and that space was nothing. Nothing is nothing, it means an absolute of nothingness, not a reduction of energy. How then is light or sound transmitted?
First, a short talk on why the aether exists: (5 minutes)
As presented in this video, in 1887 Michelson and Morley failed to detect the Earth’s motion but they did pick up a ~5 km per second aether wind. ‘The Science’ simply lies when they say that the aether was undetected. That is not what the experiment was set up to prove, and that is not what they found. Their results – finding an aether – have been replicated quite literally thousands of times including, as the video presentation states, by the US Air Force in 1986. Not many know of this.
You can’t use your ‘apriori’ assumptions or worldviews and interpret the data any way you want. A real ‘scientist’ would accept the thousands of data points that prove the aether. From there you try to explain why no motion of this planet was found.
As presented, the reason no one knows the truth about the light-interference experiments is that the entire corpus of ‘modern science’ would be rubbished. Can’t have that now.
Second, an introduction to the aether and the Michelson-Morley failure to detect the Earth’s motion in the aether, (8 minutes, you only need to watch from minute 2:45 to 7 mins, after that it is advertising).
Minute 2:45 onwards presents why ‘space’ is just another name for a material-energy rich aether. No aether, no light, no radiation, no existence. Nothing means nothing.
This 2nd video in general, comports to the confusion that is modern cosmology.
The presenter clearly states that an aether exists but asks, ‘what is it’? Fair enough. Quantum mechanics confirms an aether. The Cosmic Microwave Background also gives us a clue, since it is the backdrop of the aether. The Big Bang and Relativity both confirm the CMB or CBR (cosmic background radiation). Ironically both the CMB or CBR disproves Relativity and the Big Bang.
So pace this 2nd video, ‘The Science’ is proposing an ‘Einstein aether’ which is frankly ridiculous. Einstein did not want a material-rich, energy-laden aether. His idea was that an imponderable aether was simply a gravitational field medium. He was wrong of course. As the video above presents the ‘Einstein aether’ is so flexible it means nothing.
Further, ‘science’ knows that within the aether, light speed is variant and that the ‘relative’ velocity of both sender and receiver impact light speed calculations, which is denied by Relativity. Relative motion and velocity impacts on light measurement was known in the 17th century and was discussed against experimentation in the 14th century. So much for progress. NASA uses the Sagnac effect and Galilean calculations, which are based on light speed variance, not Relativity. All our communications and satellite technology use geocentricity for calculations, not Relativity.
Relativity is a religion of the confusionist.
As many posts on here have outlined, the aether is real, the Earth is surrounded by it, and this is why we will never be able to measure the Earth’s motion through space from below the troposphere. This is precisely what all these light-interference experiments have proven. Such a simple, direct and common sense approach to data and ‘science’ is of course anathema in an age where rods magically shorten along their length, material pops in and out of existence, you can ride moon beams, time moves back and forth, black and white holes lead to singularities, the universe of your choice, or another time-dimension, and there are 4 if not 10 dimensions of our existence.
Many of us call this fiction not science.
All hail (and to find ‘The Science’ follow the money, the awards, the privileges and the narrative).
Relativity is doomed on many fronts. One frontal assault which Einstein vigorously opposed was the 1920’s discovery or creation of quantum mechanics or QM and QED or quantum electro-dynamics. QM proposes a ponderable substance to space, in lieu of Einstein’s amorphous vacuum or ‘Relativistic Aether’, which as past posts outlined, is a seminal manipulation of rhetoric and theory without proofs.
QM nullifies Relativity, though AI and modern apologia will object (using word salads such as ‘nuanced’, ‘relativistic’ and appealing to ‘consensus’). Any ponderable substance in space which is more than just a ‘wave of gravity’ disproves Relativity. Today, physical theorists en-masse know that inner and outer space hold a vast array of particles and/or fields. Einstein as was so often the case, was once again completely wrong.
Particles that are identified within ‘space’ include:
Neutrinos2, cosmic rays, radiation, gravitons, maximons, positrons and electropons, machions, etherons, axions, newtonites, higgsionos, fermions, bosons, to name a few.
A vacuum does not exist. Yet this is taught and repeated in the ‘science media’. For a long time, even back to the Medieval period, it has been surmised and is now known, that space is composed of a world with infinitesimally small molecules of functional dimensions. Descartes’ ‘whirlpool’ or vortices redolent with matter. One physicist describes it:
“Classically, a vacuum is simply the absence of matter. In quantum mechanics, however, the [Heisenberg] uncertainty principle leads us to view the vacuum as a very complex system…The vacuum, then, is more like a pan of popcorn than a featureless, empty sea. Particle-antiparticle pairs pop into existence here and there, but disappear quickly”.3
More here
Carrying on from previous discussions about the reality of the aether, we can now fire an arrow of common sense and pierce the heart of the world’s most over-used equation: E = mc2. It is not just the aether which confounds this equation, but also light speed. Einstein takes credit for something he did not invent, and for something which is wrong. He knew that light speed was variant.
“Einstein continues: “In a similar manner we see ‘unmittelbar’ [immediately] that the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light in a vacuum must be modified. For one easily recognizes that the path of a beam of light, relative to K’, must generally be crooked, when the light, with respect to K, moves in a straight line with definite constant velocity”
….The word ‘unmittelbar’ amused me so much that I have taken care to give it in the original German….The whole paragraph is interesting because it goes on to deal with one of the profound discoveries of Relativity, that the velocity of light in reference to a body is the same whether that body be at rest, or in motion towards the source of light!
…I notice for the moment that Einstein, having postulated the constancy of light, is content to “modify” it when his own reasoning leads him to contradiction; but he does not touch the previous mode of thought that led him to decree this constancy.”
(The Case Against Einstein, Arthur Lynch, pp. 209-210)
More here
