THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE UNFINISHED SECOND REVOLUTION

[Pentcho Valev]

The Royal Society performed the first revolution in 1919 but:

http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-this-is.html
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."

The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.

Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
and making money):

http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
"ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
Scotia."

Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
revolution may be just around the corner):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
cosmologists."

Recent hints at a second revolution:

http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
public."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/01/26/ecrein26.xml&sSheet=/connected/2005/01/26/ixconnrite.html
Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
"armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."

And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."

Pentcho Valev
***@yahoo.com

[Don Stockbauer]

http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-...
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.
Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
"ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
Scotia."
Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
cosmologists."
http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
public."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/0...
Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
"armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."
And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."
Pentcho Valev

Do you also not believe in simple addition?

[Pentcho Valev]

Post by Pentcho Valev
http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-this-is.html
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.
Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
"ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
Scotia."
Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
cosmologists."
http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
public."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/01/26/ecrein26.xml&sSheet=/connected/2005/01/26/ixconnrite.html
Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
"armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."
And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."

So, effectively, Martin Rees and his Royal Society are the villains
looked for in the story below:

http://news.scotsman.com/scitech/Who39s-to-blame-for-government.3690408.jp
"There is a sense of confusion within the physics community as to how
far up this crisis goes, which is only just beginning to
unravel.....This lack of clarity over who is to blame has fed a number
of conspiracy theories......Professor Richard Kenway, the leader of
the particle theory group at Edinburgh University, said: "The biggest
cause of concern is that we don't know who the villain of the piece is
or if there even is one.....Professor Andy Lawrence, head of Edinburgh
University's school of physics, says being short of money is nothing
new: "The past 20 years has seen a gradual squeeze in these areas of
physics......"The puzzling thing is why there have been these
catastrophic cuts over such a small period. Departments haven't had a
chance to respond. "Of course, the loss of our role in international
projects is a blow, but the really shocking thing is the cut in
grants. We need people to actually analyse data and write the papers,
and without these grants how are we going to pay them?" Lawrence adds:
"The situation seems crazy because it has been shown these subjects
are the very ones that attract students to physics at a grass-roots
level. Cuts of 25 to 50 per cent are enough to send any department
into a downward spiral."

Pentcho Valev
***@yahoo.com

[Pentcho Valev]

Post by Pentcho Valev

Post by Pentcho Valev
http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-this-is.html
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.
Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
"ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
Scotia."

Those were the days my friend
We thought they'd never end
We'd sing and dance forever and a day
We'd live the life we choose
We'd fight and never lose
For we were young and sure to have our way.
La la la la...
Those were the days, oh yes those were the days

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/02/15/sciastro115.xml
"Pessimism and anger over science funding crisis.....The Royal
Astronomical Society has talked of the "deep pessimism and anger"
caused by funding cuts that it says will jeopardise university
physics."

Oh my friend we're older but no wiser
For in our hearts the dreams are still the same
Those were the days my friend
We thought they'd never end
We'd sing and dance forever and a day
We'd live the life we choose
We'd fight and never lose
For we were young and sure to have our way.
La la la la...
Those were the days, oh yes those were the days

Post by Pentcho Valev

Post by Pentcho Valev
Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomerroyal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
cosmologists."
http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
public."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/01/26/ecrein26.xml&sSheet=/connected/2005/01/26/ixconnrite.html
Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
"armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."
And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."

So, effectively, Martin Rees and his Royal Society are the villains
http://news.scotsman.com/scitech/Who39s-to-blame-for-government.3690408.jp
"There is a sense of confusion within the physics community as to how
far up this crisis goes, which is only just beginning to
unravel.....This lack of clarity over who is to blame has fed a number
of conspiracy theories......Professor Richard Kenway, the leader of
the particle theory group at Edinburgh University, said: "The biggest
cause of concern is that we don't know who the villain of the piece is
or if there even is one.....Professor Andy Lawrence, head of Edinburgh
University's school of physics, says being short of money is nothing
new: "The past 20 years has seen a gradual squeeze in these areas of
physics......"The puzzling thing is why there have been these
catastrophic cuts over such a small period. Departments haven't had a
chance to respond. "Of course, the loss of our role in international
projects is a blow, but the really shocking thing is the cut in
grants. We need people to actually analyse data and write the papers,
"The situation seems crazy because it has been shown these subjects
are the very ones that attract students to physics at a grass-roots
level. Cuts of 25 to 50 per cent are enough to send any department
into a downward spiral."
PentchoValev

[G. L. Bradford]

Post by Pentcho Valev
http://philipball.blogspot.com/2007/09/arthur-eddington-was-innocent-this-is.html
"With the technology then available, measuring the bending of
starlight was very challenging. And contrary to popular belief,
Newtonian physics did not predict that light would remain undeflected
- Einstein himself pointed out in 1911 that Newtonian gravity should
cause some deviation too. So the matter was not that of an all-or-
nothing shift in stars' positions, but hinged on the exact numbers."
The Royal Society should have considered Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2): it is consistent with the gravitational redshift factor
1+V/c^2 confirmed experimentally and therefore "Newtonian gravity"
correctly predicts the variation of the speed of light in a
gravitational field. On the other hand, Einstein's "theory" turned out
to be an incomparable money-spinner so Einstein's 1911 equation
c'=c(1+V/c^2) was swept under the rug.
Twelve years ago (the Royal Society is still just shocking the public
http://www.totse.com/en/technology/space_astronomy_nasa/ftltravl.html
"ASTRONOMERS PREDICT FASTER THAN LIGHT SPACE TRAVEL. It is boldly
going where no reputable scientific body has gone before.
Contradicting Einstein, the normally conservative Royal Astronomical
Society is about to publish a report predicting that mankind will be
able to travel faster than the speed of light. The breakthrough means
that Star Trek fantasies of interstellar civilisations and voyages
powered by warp drive are now no longer the exclusive domain of
science fiction writers...Crawford argues that modern physics may
allow two possible ways around Einstein's theory....The theories will
boost growing interest among scientists in the possibility of
travelling faster than light. The IPS, whose members include several
NASA engineers, starts its first conference shortly in Halifax, Nova
Scotia."
Six years ago (concern is growing in the Royal Society, a second
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/519406/posts
"A GROUP of astronomers and cosmologists has warned that the laws
thought to govern the universe, including Albert Einstein's theory of
relativity, must be rewritten. The group, which includes Professor
Stephen Hawking and Sir Martin Rees, the astronomer royal, say such
laws may only work for our universe but not in others that are now
also thought to exist.....AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum.....Rees, Hawking and others are so
concerned at the impact of such ideas that they recently organised a
private conference in Cambridge for more than 30 leading
cosmologists."
http://royalsociety.org/news.asp?id=3880
Royal Society: "Newton beats Einstein in polls of scientists and the
public."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2005/01/26/ecrein26.xml&sSheet=/connected/2005/01/26/ixconnrite.html
Martin Rees: "Although there's something rather noble about the way he
persevered in his attempts to reach far beyond his grasp, in some
respects the Einstein cult sends the wrong signal. It unduly exalts
"armchair theory", which by itself would achieve little."
And yet the Royal Society's second revolution remains unfinished. It
really is just around the corner: "AMONG THE IDEAS FACING REVISION IS
EINSTEIN'S BELIEF THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT MUST ALWAYS BE THE SAME -
186,000 miles a second in a vacuum."
Pentcho Valev

There isn't any faster than light travel. For you or the Royal Ass Society
to think that there is is for all of you to be ignorant of a paralleling
"now" throughout the universe never showing up in light or the speed of
light:

Loosely:
..................t(History)--------------------)/..t|Observer (now)|
..................t()---------------------)/
..................t()--------------)/-o
..................t()---------)/.............-o
..................t()-----)/..........................-o
t|object (now)|/.........................................-ot|Observer (now)|

Line of travelers' travel ( / ). The traveler will see only rapidly
advancing historical time-frames along the route to the object destination.
You'll notice there is no line of history (light) between the traveler (now)
and the ever more distant observer (now). There will be no history (no
light) whatsoever between any now and any other [paralleling] now! No
history at all! No light at all!

"-o" Very loosely, where observer observes traveler to be PER SPEED OF LIGHT
COMMUNICATION OF POSITION AND VELOCITY when traveler has actually already
arrived at the destination. The observer never deals in "now" (localized) at
any distance! But, the observer will deal in "history" (non-locality). The
observer will observe position and velocity for a traveler, neither of which
( position nor velocity) will have anything to do with the distant object
traveler.

If you can see how it goes you realize there is no such thing as traveling
faster than light no matter how fast you travel.

GLB