SOUFFLE OF PARTICLES WITH GRAVITY

[Pentcho Valev]

http://maisonneuve.org/index.php?&page_id=12&article_id=2934
"CRISES + PARADOX = REVOLUTION. WELCOME TO THE PERIMETER INSTITUTE
WHERE TODAY'S EINSTEINS ARE HARD AT WORK. It's lunchtime at the Black
Hole Bistro, an in-house restaurant at Waterloo's Perimeter Institute
for Theoretical Physics. Amid the mounting clatter and chatter,
conversation at a corner table moves from one universal subject to
another: from the questionable authenticity of the buffet chicken to
the union of quantum mechanics and general relativity. The marriage of
these two theories of the universe-incomplete on their own, but
incompatible with each other-is the coveted Rosetta stone of physics.
Quantum theory pertains to things on a very small scale, such as
particles; it's important for the study of chemistry and atomic
physics. Relativity pertains to the very large, such as gravity; it's
important for the study of astronomy and cosmology. A successful
souffle of particles with gravity, so to speak, would amount to
nothing less than the "theory of everything"......."

In 1907 Einstein discovered that that the souffle of particles with
gravity had already been cooked by Newton:

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/papers/OntologyOUP_TimesNR.pdf
"What Can We Learn about the Ontology of Space and Time from the
Theory of Relativity?", John D. Norton: "In general relativity there
is no comparable sense of the constancy of the speed of light. The
constancy of the speed of light is a consequence of the perfect
homogeneity of spacetime presumed in special relativity. There is a
special velocity at each event; homogeneity forces it to be the same
velocity everywhere. We lose that homogeneity in the transition to
general relativity and with it we lose the constancy of the speed of
light. Such was Einstein's conclusion at the earliest moments of his
preparation for general relativity. ALREADY IN 1907, A MERE TWO YEARS
AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE SPECIAL THEORY, HE HAD CONCLUDED THAT THE
SPEED OF LIGHT IS VARIABLE IN THE PRESENCE OF A GRAVITATIONAL FIELD."

Hypnotists in Einstein criminal cult know very well the implications
and even try to fit Newton's emission theory of light into Einstein's
idiocies:

http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.3/smolin.htm
"Einstein's Legacy -- Where are the "Einsteinians?", Lee Smolin:
"Quantum theory was not the only theory that bothered Einstein. Few
people have appreciated how dissatisfied he was with his own theories
of relativity. Special relativity grew out of Einstein's insight that
the laws of electromagnetism cannot depend on relative motion and that
the speed of light therefore must be always the same, no matter how
the source or the observer moves. Among the consequences of that
theory are that energy and mass are equivalent (the now-legendary
relationship E = mc2) and that time and distance are relative, not
absolute. SPECIAL RELATIVITY WAS THE RESULT OF 10 YEARS OF
INTELLECTUAL STRUGGLE, YET EINSTEIN HAD CONVINCED HIMSELF IT WAS WRONG
WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PUBLISHING IT."

http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i6272.html
John Stachel: "Not only is the theory [of relativity] compatible with
an emission theory of radiation, since it implies that the velocity of
light is always the same relative to its source; the theory also
requires that radiation transfer mass between an emitter and an
absorber, reinforcing Einstein's light quantum hypothesis that
radiation manifests a particulate structure under certain
circumstances."

http://ustl1.univ-lille1.fr/culture/publication/lna/detail/lna40/pgs/4_5.pdf
Jean Eisenstaedt: "Il n'y a alors aucune raison theorique a ce que la
vitesse de la lumiere ne depende pas de la vitesse de sa source ainsi
que de celle de l'observateur terrestre ; plus clairement encore, il
n'y a pas de raison, dans le cadre de la logique des Principia de
Newton, pour que la lumiere se comporte autrement - quant a sa
trajectoire - qu'une particule materielle. Il n'y a pas non plus de
raison pour que la lumiere ne soit pas sensible a la gravitation.
Bref, pourquoi ne pas appliquer a la lumiere toute la theorie
newtonienne ? C'est en fait ce que font plusieurs astronomes,
opticiens, philosophes de la nature a la fin du XVIIIeme siecle. Les
resultats sont etonnants... et aujourd'hui nouveaux."
Translation from French: "Therefore there is no theoretical reason why
the speed of light should not depend on the speed of the source and
the speed of the terrestrial observer as well; even more clearly,
there is no reason, in the framework of the logic of Newton's
Principia, why light should behave, as far as its trajectory is
concerned, differently from a material particle. Neither is there any
reason why light should not be sensible to gravitation. Briefly, why
don't we apply the whole Newtonian theory to light? In fact, that is
what many astronomers, opticians, philosophers of nature did by the
end of 18th century. The results are surprising....and new nowadays."

So the rest of the paper

http://maisonneuve.org/index.php?&page_id=12&article_id=2934

is devoted to new silly walks developed in Einstein criminal cult
(revolutionary silly walks):

Pentcho Valev

[Pentcho Valev]

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/april-0407/the-man-who-made-our-world
"In 1905, Einstein wrote his five famous papers. In the first of
these, the only one he himself called "revolutionary", Einstein
proposed that light consisted not of continuous waves, as had been
thought since the rejection of Newton's particle theory, but rather of
tiny bundles called quanta.....In his 1905 papers, Einstein actually
used two apparently contradictory interpretations of the nature of
light. In the paper on light quanta, Einstein had argued forcefully
for the return to Newton's particulate conception of light. Yet in the
same year, in his development of special relativity, Einstein had
rejected a particulate emission theory of light and had used the
traditional Maxwell wave theory. This striking ability to juggle two
viewpoints apparently at odds was characteristic of Einstein's
thought...."

http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/homepage/cv.html#forthcoming
"Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity and the Problems in the
Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies that Led him to it." in Cambridge
Companion to Einstein, M. Janssen and C. Lehner, eds., Cambridge
University Press. Preprint.
John Norton: "Einstein could not see how to formulate a fully
relativistic electrodynamics merely using his new device of field
transformations. So he considered the possibility of modifying
Maxwell's electrodynamics in order to bring it into accord with an
emission theory of light, such as Newton had originally conceived.
There was some inevitability in these attempts, as long as he held to
classical (Galilean) kinematics. Imagine that some emitter sends out a
light beam at c. According to this kinematics, an observer who moves
past at v in the opposite direction, will see the emitter moving at v
and the light emitted at c+v. This last fact is the defining
characteristic of an emission theory of light: the velocity of the
emitter is added vectorially to the velocity of light emitted....If an
emission theory can be formulated as a field theory, it would seem to
be unable to determine the future course of processes from their state
in the present. As long as Einstein expected a viable theory of light,
electricity and magnetism to be a field theory, these sorts of
objections would render an emission theory of light inadmissible."

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/pdf/files/975547d7-2d00-433a-b7e3-4a09145525ca.pdf
Albert Einstein: "I consider it entirely possible that physics cannot
be based upon the field concept, that is on continuous structures.
Then nothing will remain of my whole castle in the air, including the
theory of gravitation, but also nothing of the rest of contemporary
physics."

Pentcho Valev