Kaiduorkhon
11-02-04, 09:59 PM
EINSTEIN : 'MAN OF THE CENTURY': On Marginal Ice?
:rolleyes:
(11/2/04)
**************
It has come to the attention of many hit & miss, off & on, net potatoes - including myself - that, although there are certainly many international discussions about Einstein and/or his real, alleged or imagined, misunderstood and clarified scientific contributions and equivocations, there is not, for example a thread - that I know of - dedicated (per se) to subjecting he or his work, here on the (duly revered) SciForum.com/ newthread Index, for example.
Neither, in the humble opinion of this record, is there anywhere near enough non-mathematically comprehensive explanations and interpretations of his most important contributions to science. This deficit seems to be vigorously displaced with a plethora of scientifically endorsed 'explanations' that the majority of Einstein's scientific works are non-mathematically 'incomprehensible', and 'unimaginable'...
Einstein is an internationally acknowledged revered memory and was - for many venrable reasons - an actively venerated man in his own time.
Scientist. Man of Letters. Pacifist. Humanitarian (and, yes, to some extent 'womanizer').
On the other hand, there appears to be a growing trend of 'Einstein bashing', ranging from accurate corrections of some of his (acknowledged, variously known and obscure) personal and scientific errors, to less restrained, freelance designations of him as a moral and scientific arbiter for anything and everything - right & wrong, good, bad and oogly. Oscillating from 'over-rated', to 'underestimated'...
Hocus-Abra Pocus-Kadabra - pro & con - examples abound: of capricious appointments of Einstein as a standard locus around which orbits no small number of (especially scientific) revisionists. (If you wish to append some clout to whatever point attempting to be made, simply sprinkle a little AlbEin dust on it, whether it be the magic powder of The Man of The Century himself, or the dandruff of the mercenary applicator).
The most blatent example of which has come to the attention of this record by way of would-be Oraclular Authority is on page seven hundred something (I don't happen to have the over-rated book in my possession at this time) of GRAVITATION, by Misner, Thorne & Wheeler - a trio of off-topic wandering, concomitant co-authors who omnipotently dispatch scientific concepts to phallicly 'cleave unto their spouse', for example.
Whereas, on page seven hundred something, their consensus is that 'Einstein predicted the big bang theory'... Peter Ustinov and Carl Sagan proclaimed the same myth... Whereas: Einstein did not predict the big bang theory.
Einstein did predict the real possibility of a spatially expanding universe (in 1919); he certainly did not predict the 'big bang' theory; which was hurriedly and desperately whipped up (refer La Place and Poincare, et al) after H. Sylpher discovered it in 1927 and Edwin Hubble refined it to 'the further the source of light, the faster it's rate of recession', in the early '30's.
The Misner, Thorne, Wheeler (GRAVITATION) statement ('Einstein predicted the big bang theory'), is not a simple mistake, it is a contrived (exemplary), duplicitous prevarication. From it's original and deliberate fabricators has since emerged a generation of believers who don't know any better.
The reader of the work at point here may or not agree with this record, in his observation that GRAVITATION was co-authored by three - admittedly well educated - buffons, who spent too much time seated in the lavatory, studying LADY CHATTERLY'S LOVER, and the exploits of the MARQUIS de SADE. (Ergo, the superfluous innuendoes and awkward allusions to the libido and crotch - especially in the leading chapter or transitionally leading titles throughout the undeniably Big GRAVITATION - Book, need be seen and read to be 'believed'. Freud's civilization was never so auto-erotically discontented.
In the admitted, prejudiced opinion of this record, if book burning ever becomes fashionable in the name of women's liberation, GRAVITATION, by Misner, Thorne & Wheeler, will certainly contribute handsomely to lighting up - and taking back - the night...
Fortunately, the world is certainly not short on well intended and reasonably accurate, sometimes remarkably astute accounts of Einstein's achievements and personal life.
The title, EINSTEIN: His Life & Times, by Ronald W. Clark (a fairly recent publication, memorably containing many previously unpublished photographs of and unknown facts about The Man Of The Century), comes to the record's recollection, upon consideration of the many homages paid to Einstein, by as many worthy biographical and scientific authors.
Whereas, George Gamow's ONE, TWO, THREE INFINITY, although it provides many interesting insights into as many crevasses, nooks and crannies of physical science, is, in the opinion of this record, stereo-typically and palpably resentful and covetous of Einstein - especially his scientific achievements and perhaps also, his quasi mystical, charismatic, celebrity, scientific and social status. Sometimes contemptibly perceived (by those who would be his peers, if they knew how?) as a man to posthumously - often apocryphly second guess, look down upon, berate and correct, than a man - and his work - to look up to and learn from and thereby honor by
(perhaps) improving upon.
For all of the regularly circulated 'contradictions' and 'proofs against' Einstein's work, until further notice, he continues to occupy the latest and greatest coordinates in the heirarchy of Contemporary Theoretical Physics (which has recently evolved into a politically correctionalized and calibrated, spin-doctoring, bread & circus tossing word salad, TV hosted electroniColiseum; featuring THE DAY AFTER hangovers of LOST PLATOONs of aviators taking flight from (never mind the Golden Triangle?) Bainbridge, Maryland, waking up the next morning <with abruptly folded wings?> in the smoke stacks of a fleet of merchant ships moored to a pier in Rangoon, wondering what happened to the - or if they ever had a - navigator...)
Don't see how there could be 'too many' leading threads featuring Einstein, while - in my limited experience on the net - not seeing many of them.
My inspiration and interest in this - what I may only hope becomes a popular thread - is simply that I was fortunate enough - 48 years past - to inadvertantly stumble (Yes. Quite unintentionally and ignorantly; for better and worser) into what I later learned was the non-mathematical translation of what has since and repeatedly been authentically confirmed by a retinue of authorities, as being the previously unachieved - traditionally considered 'undoable', sans mathematics - explanation of Einstein's greatest -formerly 'non-mathematically unapproachable, incomprehensible and unimaginable' achievements...
Particularly those of the Special Theory of Relativity (light and uniform velocity) in 1906, the General Theory (gravity and non-uniform velocity: acceleration), 1916, and the Unified Field Theory (the goal of which is to find gravity and electromagnetism as two apparently unrelated phenomena, actually having the same causal identity) *1919 (Originally promulgated as the 'Steady State Theory' - very much paralleling Einstein's proposed Unified Fiedl - by Hoyle, Bondi and Gold); abandoned as 'superfluous', after the discovery of the spatially expanding - Hubble's red shift - universe, *less than a decade later. This record rarely chances predictions. Whereas, it appears imminent that Einstein's presently abandoned Cosmological Constant - SteadyState advocating universe - is imminently bound to be reinstated.
Displacing altogether the - all time jiffyfixed, jerry-rigged - suspiciously spin-doctored, frantially slapped together apparition of Dr. Frankenstein's BIG BANG! ('It's alive! It's alive!')
............................................
The following statement was included in a letter sent to The Editors, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 415 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y., and cc'd to this author (KBR), by Mr. David F. Sicks (Vietnam Vet, Bush Pilot),
Anchorage Alaska, 14 May 1976:
(Re" WILL THE UNIVERSE EXPAND FOREVER?' - Scientific American (Science & the Citizen), March 1976, and 'AN ACCELERATING UNIVERSE?' December 1975. This article states "...that most recent observational data... fit closely all models in which the (Hubble's red shift) expansion is accelerating'.
Both articles are authored by James E. Gunn and Beatrice M. Tinsley, who concluded: "the prediction of accelerating expansion is contrary to expectation... and that something must be terribly wrong..."
I wish to point out that something may very well be terribly wrong - especially so if - "the net forces between (receding) galaxies really are repulsive (repelling forces - re: Einstein's abandoned Cosmological - Steady State Theory advocating - Constant), and if gravitational values really are "equivalent to and synchronous with inertial acceleration values beyond a billionth of a second and the (since then improved) technical ability to measure any further"... (- THE NEW GRAVITY: Is The 4th Dimension, April, 1975, Kent Benjamin Robertson <aka Kent Robertson ben Abraham>).
Is it possible that we are overlooking a rather obvious possibility concerning the real nature of 'gravity'?
- David F. Sicks, Anchorage, Alaska. 5.14.'76
(To the best of this record's knowledge this letter was not responded to, neither are its ominous implications particularly controversial (yet), in or out of the mainstream, though there are obscurely distributed essays, articles and books eliciting the same conspicuously and selectively unacknowleged, unanswered - generally ignored - questions.)
.................................................. ...........
Your's Truly, humbly refers the Reader to the 6th (sold out), 54 page condensed edition of a 627 page (sold out) 5th edition, small press printed, distributed, unprecedented, non-mathematical presentation of Einstein's work, at http://einstein.periphery.cc/
Constructively critical or corroborating affirmations and correlations - certainly and emphatically including different approaches and subjections of the proposed Forum Topic - The Universe & Dr. Einstein - are cordially welcomed and invited.
Thank you for reading this missive.
Sincerely, Kent Benjamin Robertson
World's Number One Einstein Groupie
Kraziequus@yahoo.com
(KaiduOrkhon, Aka The White Mongol,
Mystic Horse.)
Vini. Vici. Entiendo.
(This thread respectfully dedicated to:
Albert - 'The Axe' - Einstein:
THE LAST MAN STANDING,
and whomever may contribute to
and/or consider it worthy. 11/2/04.
Special gratitude to Mr. David F. Sicks,
of Anchorage Alaska.)
___________________________________
:rolleyes:
(11/2/04)
**************
It has come to the attention of many hit & miss, off & on, net potatoes - including myself - that, although there are certainly many international discussions about Einstein and/or his real, alleged or imagined, misunderstood and clarified scientific contributions and equivocations, there is not, for example a thread - that I know of - dedicated (per se) to subjecting he or his work, here on the (duly revered) SciForum.com/ newthread Index, for example.
Neither, in the humble opinion of this record, is there anywhere near enough non-mathematically comprehensive explanations and interpretations of his most important contributions to science. This deficit seems to be vigorously displaced with a plethora of scientifically endorsed 'explanations' that the majority of Einstein's scientific works are non-mathematically 'incomprehensible', and 'unimaginable'...
Einstein is an internationally acknowledged revered memory and was - for many venrable reasons - an actively venerated man in his own time.
Scientist. Man of Letters. Pacifist. Humanitarian (and, yes, to some extent 'womanizer').
On the other hand, there appears to be a growing trend of 'Einstein bashing', ranging from accurate corrections of some of his (acknowledged, variously known and obscure) personal and scientific errors, to less restrained, freelance designations of him as a moral and scientific arbiter for anything and everything - right & wrong, good, bad and oogly. Oscillating from 'over-rated', to 'underestimated'...
Hocus-Abra Pocus-Kadabra - pro & con - examples abound: of capricious appointments of Einstein as a standard locus around which orbits no small number of (especially scientific) revisionists. (If you wish to append some clout to whatever point attempting to be made, simply sprinkle a little AlbEin dust on it, whether it be the magic powder of The Man of The Century himself, or the dandruff of the mercenary applicator).
The most blatent example of which has come to the attention of this record by way of would-be Oraclular Authority is on page seven hundred something (I don't happen to have the over-rated book in my possession at this time) of GRAVITATION, by Misner, Thorne & Wheeler - a trio of off-topic wandering, concomitant co-authors who omnipotently dispatch scientific concepts to phallicly 'cleave unto their spouse', for example.
Whereas, on page seven hundred something, their consensus is that 'Einstein predicted the big bang theory'... Peter Ustinov and Carl Sagan proclaimed the same myth... Whereas: Einstein did not predict the big bang theory.
Einstein did predict the real possibility of a spatially expanding universe (in 1919); he certainly did not predict the 'big bang' theory; which was hurriedly and desperately whipped up (refer La Place and Poincare, et al) after H. Sylpher discovered it in 1927 and Edwin Hubble refined it to 'the further the source of light, the faster it's rate of recession', in the early '30's.
The Misner, Thorne, Wheeler (GRAVITATION) statement ('Einstein predicted the big bang theory'), is not a simple mistake, it is a contrived (exemplary), duplicitous prevarication. From it's original and deliberate fabricators has since emerged a generation of believers who don't know any better.
The reader of the work at point here may or not agree with this record, in his observation that GRAVITATION was co-authored by three - admittedly well educated - buffons, who spent too much time seated in the lavatory, studying LADY CHATTERLY'S LOVER, and the exploits of the MARQUIS de SADE. (Ergo, the superfluous innuendoes and awkward allusions to the libido and crotch - especially in the leading chapter or transitionally leading titles throughout the undeniably Big GRAVITATION - Book, need be seen and read to be 'believed'. Freud's civilization was never so auto-erotically discontented.
In the admitted, prejudiced opinion of this record, if book burning ever becomes fashionable in the name of women's liberation, GRAVITATION, by Misner, Thorne & Wheeler, will certainly contribute handsomely to lighting up - and taking back - the night...
Fortunately, the world is certainly not short on well intended and reasonably accurate, sometimes remarkably astute accounts of Einstein's achievements and personal life.
The title, EINSTEIN: His Life & Times, by Ronald W. Clark (a fairly recent publication, memorably containing many previously unpublished photographs of and unknown facts about The Man Of The Century), comes to the record's recollection, upon consideration of the many homages paid to Einstein, by as many worthy biographical and scientific authors.
Whereas, George Gamow's ONE, TWO, THREE INFINITY, although it provides many interesting insights into as many crevasses, nooks and crannies of physical science, is, in the opinion of this record, stereo-typically and palpably resentful and covetous of Einstein - especially his scientific achievements and perhaps also, his quasi mystical, charismatic, celebrity, scientific and social status. Sometimes contemptibly perceived (by those who would be his peers, if they knew how?) as a man to posthumously - often apocryphly second guess, look down upon, berate and correct, than a man - and his work - to look up to and learn from and thereby honor by
(perhaps) improving upon.
For all of the regularly circulated 'contradictions' and 'proofs against' Einstein's work, until further notice, he continues to occupy the latest and greatest coordinates in the heirarchy of Contemporary Theoretical Physics (which has recently evolved into a politically correctionalized and calibrated, spin-doctoring, bread & circus tossing word salad, TV hosted electroniColiseum; featuring THE DAY AFTER hangovers of LOST PLATOONs of aviators taking flight from (never mind the Golden Triangle?) Bainbridge, Maryland, waking up the next morning <with abruptly folded wings?> in the smoke stacks of a fleet of merchant ships moored to a pier in Rangoon, wondering what happened to the - or if they ever had a - navigator...)
Don't see how there could be 'too many' leading threads featuring Einstein, while - in my limited experience on the net - not seeing many of them.
My inspiration and interest in this - what I may only hope becomes a popular thread - is simply that I was fortunate enough - 48 years past - to inadvertantly stumble (Yes. Quite unintentionally and ignorantly; for better and worser) into what I later learned was the non-mathematical translation of what has since and repeatedly been authentically confirmed by a retinue of authorities, as being the previously unachieved - traditionally considered 'undoable', sans mathematics - explanation of Einstein's greatest -formerly 'non-mathematically unapproachable, incomprehensible and unimaginable' achievements...
Particularly those of the Special Theory of Relativity (light and uniform velocity) in 1906, the General Theory (gravity and non-uniform velocity: acceleration), 1916, and the Unified Field Theory (the goal of which is to find gravity and electromagnetism as two apparently unrelated phenomena, actually having the same causal identity) *1919 (Originally promulgated as the 'Steady State Theory' - very much paralleling Einstein's proposed Unified Fiedl - by Hoyle, Bondi and Gold); abandoned as 'superfluous', after the discovery of the spatially expanding - Hubble's red shift - universe, *less than a decade later. This record rarely chances predictions. Whereas, it appears imminent that Einstein's presently abandoned Cosmological Constant - SteadyState advocating universe - is imminently bound to be reinstated.
Displacing altogether the - all time jiffyfixed, jerry-rigged - suspiciously spin-doctored, frantially slapped together apparition of Dr. Frankenstein's BIG BANG! ('It's alive! It's alive!')
............................................
The following statement was included in a letter sent to The Editors, SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, 415 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y., and cc'd to this author (KBR), by Mr. David F. Sicks (Vietnam Vet, Bush Pilot),
Anchorage Alaska, 14 May 1976:
(Re" WILL THE UNIVERSE EXPAND FOREVER?' - Scientific American (Science & the Citizen), March 1976, and 'AN ACCELERATING UNIVERSE?' December 1975. This article states "...that most recent observational data... fit closely all models in which the (Hubble's red shift) expansion is accelerating'.
Both articles are authored by James E. Gunn and Beatrice M. Tinsley, who concluded: "the prediction of accelerating expansion is contrary to expectation... and that something must be terribly wrong..."
I wish to point out that something may very well be terribly wrong - especially so if - "the net forces between (receding) galaxies really are repulsive (repelling forces - re: Einstein's abandoned Cosmological - Steady State Theory advocating - Constant), and if gravitational values really are "equivalent to and synchronous with inertial acceleration values beyond a billionth of a second and the (since then improved) technical ability to measure any further"... (- THE NEW GRAVITY: Is The 4th Dimension, April, 1975, Kent Benjamin Robertson <aka Kent Robertson ben Abraham>).
Is it possible that we are overlooking a rather obvious possibility concerning the real nature of 'gravity'?
- David F. Sicks, Anchorage, Alaska. 5.14.'76
(To the best of this record's knowledge this letter was not responded to, neither are its ominous implications particularly controversial (yet), in or out of the mainstream, though there are obscurely distributed essays, articles and books eliciting the same conspicuously and selectively unacknowleged, unanswered - generally ignored - questions.)
.................................................. ...........
Your's Truly, humbly refers the Reader to the 6th (sold out), 54 page condensed edition of a 627 page (sold out) 5th edition, small press printed, distributed, unprecedented, non-mathematical presentation of Einstein's work, at http://einstein.periphery.cc/
Constructively critical or corroborating affirmations and correlations - certainly and emphatically including different approaches and subjections of the proposed Forum Topic - The Universe & Dr. Einstein - are cordially welcomed and invited.
Thank you for reading this missive.
Sincerely, Kent Benjamin Robertson
World's Number One Einstein Groupie
Kraziequus@yahoo.com
(KaiduOrkhon, Aka The White Mongol,
Mystic Horse.)
Vini. Vici. Entiendo.
(This thread respectfully dedicated to:
Albert - 'The Axe' - Einstein:
THE LAST MAN STANDING,
and whomever may contribute to
and/or consider it worthy. 11/2/04.
Special gratitude to Mr. David F. Sicks,
of Anchorage Alaska.)
___________________________________