"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
news:6idhruca6ne0irpc4184oe5hdmi5nugiph at 4ax.com...
>cary at afone.as.arizona.edu (Cary Kittrell) wrote:
>> >Copyright 1984 The New York Times Company
> > The New York Times
> > February 14, 1984, Tuesday, Late City Final Edition
> >SECTION: Section C; Page 1, Column 5; Science Desk
> >HEADLINE: EINSTEIN REVEALED AS BRILLIANT IN YOUTH
> >BYLINE: By WALTER SULLIVAN
> > Before that, at Aargau, French was almost his nemesis. Swiss
> >archives have produced the minutes of a teacher's conference held on
> >March 15, 1899, in which it was noted that a written reprimand from
> >the French teacher had been entered in Einstein's record.
> > When he finally graduated this blemish was again noted. He was
> >''promoted with protest in French,'' his transcript read.
>> So social promotion is neither a modern nor American public school
> invention %^)
Except that in Einstein's case, this was a racial promotion. STUPID jews
like Einstein would never even be in major universities without a little
"affirmative action" to give morons like him an unfair advantage.
Einstein and Emperor's new cloths
Einstein was the smartest person in the world. I am so impressed that I
try to read everything about Einstein.. The more I've read, the more I
How come he gets so much fame? How come he gets all the name and credit
even though some other scientists should get more then him?
How come when people discover something, they always like to make a
connection with Einstein and give their credit to Einstein?
How come Einstein say "yes" then say "no". Either way, "yes" people
or "no" people both believe Einstein is right and both give credit to
(question 3)How come when people discover something, which even does not
Einstein's name nor relativity, people still make a connection with
relativity and give credit to Einstein? Even Einstein himself would be
(question 4)I raised some equations to be open discussion to clear my
1. From what I read, Lorentz transformation is the first instance to
assume the speed of light is constant. And measure of time and distance
very systematically as anything moves relative to anything else. These
concepts were created by Lorentz, not Einstein. Einstein may use the
common language to interpret these concepts and call it another
name "special relativity". Everything derived from special relativity
are based on Lorentz transformations. So the packaging may belong to
Einstein, but the content belongs to Lorentz. When you hear
famous "where is the beaf". We should know that content is more
important than packaging. In my opinion, Lorentz should be called the
father of special relativity not Einstein. How come Einstein gets all
the credit, but Lorentz gets nothing? 98% percent of people in the
world do not know who is the guy called "Lorentz", but 100% of people
know Einstein. It is not fair. Besides, for the 1912 Nobel prize in
physics, Lorentz is the major winner and Einstein took place in second.
I don't think many people know that, too. In 1912, when Lorentz was
selected to win the 1912 Nobel Prize, Wien, the winner of 1911 who
recommended Einstein says
While Lorentz must be considered as the first to have found the
mathematical content of the relativity principle. Einstein succeeded in
reducing it to a simple principal. One should therefore assess the
merit of both investigators as being comparable...
2. At first, Einstein said the Universe is static with cosmological
constant. He cannot prove it only mention it. In 1930, when Hubble
prove that the galaxies actually moving away from the earth, Einstein
changed his mind and believed Universe is expanding and the Big Bang
theory was started. I do not know what happened, one of only 12 people
in the world who knew general relativity, he said that Big Bang is
derive from equations of general relativity and conclude that Universe
can be expand or contract (He may be Alexander Freemann -- information
from NOVA on line). Even Einstein himself had a big surprise that his
general relativity had that kind of conclusion. I don't think Fred
Hoyle or Steve Hawkins mentioned anything about general relativity, but
Einstein still get whole credit.
In recent years, some people believe that Universe is static there is a
cosmological constant. . So people say, "you see" Einstein was right
from the beginning. They still give the credit to Einstein. I don't
know if those people who give credit to Einstein realize that if the
Universe is static, the conclusion of general relativity by Alexander
Freemann is wrong. So general relativity may be wrong. Nobody mentions
it they just ignore it. So general relativity is still the greatest
theory in the world.
Alexander Freemann derived his conclusion from equations of GR that the
Universe can expand or contract are very ambiguous. Because if somebody
concluded from a set mathematical equations, the conclusion must be
either expand or contract not both. Otherwise there is a parameter to
determine expansion or contraction. Can not be both without any
Equations of general relativity are the key point of this conclusion.
So I found the equations in web site. The equations of GR are in Ricci
tensor form. This tensor form is based on elliptic geometry. Einstein
assumes Universe was elliptic geometry only because when he found a
serious error in his reserch, he remembered that he had studied
Gaussian theory in school, which is a theory of Riemannian geometry
(Elliptic geometry). So he consulted his friend Grossman who was able
to tell Einstein about important developments of Riemann, Ricci and
Levi-Civita. In 1913 Einstein and Grossman joint published the
equations of GR in metric tensor form, but still the theory was not
right. In fact every year he corrected and submitted a new version of
equations of GR. Even Einstein himself says, "That follow Einstein
suits his convenience. Every year he retracts what he wrote the year
November 1915, Einstein and Hilbert worked together to get the so-
called final form of "gravitational field equations". It was so
complicated that nobody understands to be able to challenge if the
equations are right or wrong. So that is the so-called final version of
the equations stick. In my opinion, nobody challenging the correction
of the equations does not mean it is right. Einstein had changed it so
many times, how could he guarantee that it is really the correct
version. If person really understands what he doing, he should not make
corrections so many times.
Besides, there are two kinds of Non-Euclidean geometry, Hyperbolic and
In Elliptic space, every light ray is a geodesic line. Light rays will
be circling the geodesic line forever unless blocked by some object. We
can see the same light ray of star many times over, because the light
ray circles in the space forever. Also, we can see the same star from
opposite directions many times too. The Universe was at least many
billions old. All the lights of the sun and stars had collected so many
billions of years. The Universe should be so bright even at nighttime.
Of course that is not the case. So the possibility of the Universe is
ether Euclidean or Hyperbolic Universe, if the Universe is not an
Elliptic space. We don't care if Einstein's equations are right or
wrong, it simply not suitable to applied. All the GR go out of the door.
Hundreds of years before Einstein, many people believed the Universe is
Non-Euclidean space. Non-Euclidean space means there is a space
constant. Space constant means cosmological constant. They are same
things with difference names. When cosmological constant was proved (or
believed to be proved), how come the credit went to Einstein but not
the many people who believed the Universe is Non-Euclidean before
Einstein covers both "yes" and "no". He definitely gets credit either
way. It is not fair.
Both "yes" and "no" are contradiction each other. How could they both
developed from the same general relativity? Is it possible people just
try to use Einstein's name to prove they are right?
I tried to find out what general relativity is. I found a very good
article written by Alan Lightman. In the article, he says "Einstein
publish in 1915, general relativity proposed that gravity, as well as
motion, can affect the intervals of time and of space. The key ideal of
general relativity, called the equivalence of principle, is that
gravity pulling in one direction is completely equivalence to an
acceleration in the opposite direction." There is no equations, no
transformations, no result but only a statement. How could this one
statement conclude the Universe is static and also conclude the
Universe is expanding even though they both contradict each other.
3. One of the most famous predictions of general relativity is bending
of starlight by gravity in 1917 and proved in 1922 (Einstein still
believed in the cosmological constant). When light was proved to be
bending, people say general relativity is right. I don't see much
connection with general relativity. If light is a particle with mass,
and the sun has a massive mass. Obviously, light will be attracted by
the sun's gravity. Even Newton's theory says so. How come this light
bending is so great only because Einstein says so?
Besides, Einstein predicts the bending angle is 1.74 degree. But the
actual measurement is off by a factor of 2. So Einstein said the one
half is banded by Newton's gravity. And other half is caused by general
relativity's space curvature. There are two reasons this 1.74 degree
angle has problems.
(A). In 1922, when light bending was proved, Einstein still
believed in the cosmological constant. So, he uses space curvature to
explain the other half of light bending. After 1930, Einstein dropped
the concept of cosmological constant, so to use space curvature to
explained the other half of light bending after 1930 is not consistent.
Before 1922, Einstein uses some theory to explain the other half of
light bending. After he dropped that theory in 1930, keeping the same
explanation is wrong, because the base of that theory does not exist
(B). From Einstein's general relativity, the closer to the sun,
the curvature bends more. That means every point has different
curvature. That means there are infinite different space curvatures in
one space. There is no such space. One space can only have one space
curvature. Besides, in uniform Non-Euclidean space, curvature does not
bend any direction. They don't bend toward the sun or away from the
sun. Straight line in Non-Euclidean space, observed by Euclidean space,
looks like a bending curve. They simply do not bend. That means there
is no such thing as space curvature cause the straight line bends 1.74
degree to any direction. If they really bend to any special direction,
they cannot be called space curvature.
I think Einstein did it again. He simply bent the facts to suits his
4. When Dewey B. Larson wrote an article to prove Einstein was wrong,
and Mr. Robert E. McElwaine post in remarq.com called "Lasonian
Relativity, Einstein was wring!" to be discussed, people don't even
bother to read the article. People say "You do not try to ridicule me
with silly joke", " on Nards! Lutefisk! Durian fruit!" I don't know
about you, but only scientific source I believed are the ones which
have a lot of the nouns in capital letters" " Perhaps god is a cow
guiding us with gamma rays". When people proved Einstein was right, we
don't see any detail or equations, but the whole world believes it.
When people proved Einstein is wrong, they write down so much detail
that people don't even want to look at it. I wonder if Einstein is god?
Equations of general relativity in tensor form are so complicated that
nobody understands. I don't think even Einstein understood his own
equations. If he really understood, he wouldn't need other scientist's
help to correct them so many times. If he really understood, he
wouldn't need to be surprised when Alexander Freemann used his
equations of general relativity to prove the universe can be expand or
contract. Instead of believing in cosmological constant and
embarrassing himself, he should have proved it by his own.(He
says "that is my blunder time in my life") Don't you think if anyone
really understood something, they should be able to easily derived the
conclusion. In recent years, some people may have proved the Big Bang
theory is wrong. If the Big Bang theory is really wrong, then Alexander
Freemann is wrong and general relativity is wrong.
Since Einstein published his theory of relativity, almost one century
has passed. From my understanding, less than 12 people in the world
really understand general relativity. It also difficult to identify
those 12 people. I don't know they really exist or not. Even one of the
famous scientist (I don't remember his name) being identified as the
third people in the world who understands general relativity, he simply
deny it and say, "I am still looking for the third person".
People like Relativity because they can exercise their unlimited and
spectacular imaginations. All they need to say is relativity, curve
time space, four dimensions, near light speed or Einstein's gravity.
After Einstein publish his final version of equations of general
relativity. He did not do too much work on relativity. Most creation of
fantasy world are the result of public imagination, more like science
fictions. So many kind of versions just like Allice's wonder land.
And just recenly, NEC research group public there experiment of
breaking the speed of light. That put special relativity in questions
Even after almost one century, still only less than 12 people really
understand general relativity. There must be something wrong. It makes
me think about the similarity to the Emperor's new clothes. Maybe I am
stupid. But the Emperor's new cloths were first seen-through by a
stupid kid. Smart people do not dare to say so.
If the special relativity is right. Lorentz is the father of special
relativity, and general relativity like Emperor's new cloths. L don't
know how much left for Einstein.
Is Einstein fake?
In this hundred years, Einstein creates the science of Alice's
wonderland. It wastes so much time and talent let scientist live in
fantasy world. Every thing again relativity will be repelled even they
are right. What had been happen like this is the most tradigy in the