Einsteinhoax wrote:
The Brilliance of Our Teachers
A recent newspaper question and answer column raised an
interesting
subject. The query noted that, for a science course at a local
school, there
were two instructors. One of those instructors explained the concepts
clearly and his students did well on standardized tests. The other
instructor's teachings were scattered and his students performed
poorly. The
students, however, believed that the second instructor was brilliant
and
thought that his explanations are simply over their heads. The query
went on
to ask why such a misperception occurred.
The answer given was that both groups were easily misled into
believing
that mysterious people are highly intelligent. When those listeners
heard
material they didn't grasp, they assumed that the fault was theirs
and not
the teachers. And, since the listeners considered themselves fairly
intelligent, it was obvious that the teacher must be brilliant!
Judging from the material posted in these Newsgroups, the effect
would
seem to be quite pronounced. It is quite plain that the posters
ardently
believe in the validity of what they have been taught. It is also
quite
obvious that they are aware, if only sublimely, of the
inconsistencies and
contradictions within that teaching. If that were not the case, the
subject
matter would be straightforward by now, the understanding of modern
physics
would not be so muddled, and the postings would not suggest such a
high
level of misunderstanding.
The truth of the matter is that the subjects, relativity in
particular,
seem mysterious and contradictory for one basic reason. The teachers
of the
subject do not themselves understand it. Because they don't
understand the
subject they hide behind sophisticated, often unnecessary and
sometimes self
contradictory mathematical explanations to prevent that lack of
understanding from being apparent. In order to achieve this goal they
have
made Physics into the only Science where MECHANISM is not considered.
This
is illustrated by a quotation from Dr. Hawking who exclaimed, in an
interview, that he was only interested in mathematics and observation
and in
the correlation of the two approaches. He didn't care about "reality"
(for
which we may read mechanism) because he didn't know what reality was.
This
is unfortunate because the present practice of ignoring mechanism,
and
overlooking the fact that nothing is known until observation,
mathematics
and understanding of mechanism are in agreement. Without such an
agreement
an understanding of the process(es) involved is not assured. It is
only when
all three requirements have been met that we can have any hope of
knowing
"who is doing what to whom".
Even more important, without including mechanism in our
understanding
matrix, we eliminate a vital check on validity. The mathematics of
many
processes extends to regions which are physically unrealizable.
Without
considering mechanism these "empty" regions will not be recognized.
An
example of the effect is the idea that "virtual photons" can explain
forces
which act at a distance. "Virtual photons" can easily explain
repulsive
forces acting between material particles, but they can not be used to
explain attractive forces. The same is true of "gravitons". They
cannot
produce the attractive force of gravity! "Virtual particles" can only
produce repulsive forces. An understanding "mechanism" reveals this
deficiency quite clearly.
To put the relativity concepts into perspective, the current
orthodoxy
accepts the validity of the idea that there are no absolutes. Length
is what
yardsticks measure and time is what clocks measure. What is
conveniently
overlooked is that the forces existing between the atoms in a
yardstick and
the hairspring of a clock escapement (or their conceptual equivalents
in
actual test equipment) must be electromagnetic in nature. Not only is
electromagnetism the only known candidate for these forces, the need
for
them follows if the questionable idea of modern physics that
interatomic
forces are produced by the exchange of "virtual photons" is not to
collapse
instantaneously. In addition, the speed of a clock is affected by the
mass
of its balance wheel (or equivalent) as given by M=E/C^2 and the
stiffness
of the forces between the nuclei of the "hairspring" (or equivalent).
Since
all of the preceding are functions of the velocity of light in the
local
reference frame, it is rather foolish to make the assertion that
length is
what yardsticks measure and time is what clocks measure without
taking into
account the effect that possible changes in the actual velocity of
light
might have on them. Such changes may be concealed by relativistically
induced changes in the atomic spacings, stiffnesses and inertial
masses of
our instruments When one does take these considerations into account,
the
Principle of Relativity and the invariance of the local velocity of
light
follow at once for the simple reason that matter must be using the
local "en
vacuo" velocity of light to control its parameters. A physicist who
does not
recognize this instinctively is clearly in the wrong line of work. (I
understand Wal-Mart is hiring.). One does not need to resort to the
sophisticated and to a large degree defective teachings of an
arrogant
intellectual elite Once the basics are recognized, the understanding
of the
process involved do not require advanced mathematics, they are within
the
capabilities of a bright high school physics student.
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity"
(1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in
Special
Relativity (1999) located at
http://members.isp.com/
/einsteinhoax/site.htm .
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING
ELSE
WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
OBSERVATIONS, AND
IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS
MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All Newsposts by this Website are available at
http://members.isp.com//einsteinhoax/postinglog.htm
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not
monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same
courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our
parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that
you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:-
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for
over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF
THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom
without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot
be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with
one
exception for which a correction was provided.
Your article is well constructed--the para on elitism crumbled however
with your "hiring at WalMart" comment--showing me you might be on a
Wien's vice Plank cavity radiation plot--meaning similiar elitism
curves but slightly different radiancy points.
Education to educators is like muscles to atheletes--and there are
thugs in athletics as well as education--some hit you with flesh, some
with words--a thick shell, however, protects from both.
Tut
.
