Einstein exposed.
(media.scored.co)
Comments (107)
sorted by:
Here is the debunk of Einstein's model of the photo-electric effect:
https://thescienceanalyst.substack.com/p/quantum-physics-has-been-falsified (There is never any photon.)
The general relativity has the following problem: If gravity is acceleration, one would see the effect of acceleration on electric charges (induction). But we don't see that effect. So gravity is not acceleration (for electric charge).
Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge. C.G. Jung
Judging/discerning accurately is even harder.
LOL
Do you disagree?
What does it mean to discern something accurately? To know whether someone is lying or being dishonest? I find that's intuition at work and not conscious thought there's a book called Blink that talks about that subject in depth
It means to tell the truth from falsehood. It could be an intentional lie or it could be ignorance or delusion. Intuition (what I'd call the heart or nous) plays a part but it's always subjective and points to the self. When we're engaging with the external world, I'd refer to rationality and logical argumentation instead because it presents a common ground, being objective and universal. My point was we judge all the time whether something is true or false and judging in that sense is absolutely necessary and everyone does it. This is basic epistemology.
It seems like Jung apprehends the word in a narrow and superficial manner and it ends up reading like something out of a boomer facebook philosophy quotes page. For all his psycho-mystical mumbo-jumbo and some interesting insights here and there, Jung wasn't much of a philosopher.
In my experience that is absolutely not the case, there's maybe a handful of actual thinkers in the world and a fuck load of parrots
I'm not a fan of Jung other than his work on synchronicity But there's some Nietzsche I can get inside
I was huge on Nietzsche in my 20's, red all his work, but outgrew him and became a Christian. He has some great and relevant ideas but he's not a systematic philosopher for a reason - his views are not consistent and many of them are based on unjustified assumptions. He has passion and rhetoric though which makes his stuff convincing, and yes he has genius.
His biggest fail is his materialism, naturalism, determinism and denial of absolute truth (which is a self refuting claim). If he were consistent with those his whole Ubermensch raving loses epistemic ground - why should anyone care about his subjective preference of what man should be? And since he's a naturalist and determinist why do ethics (what should one ought to do) matter at all?
He also ignored Hume's destruction of naturalism and basic bitch empiricism ("You can't get an "ought" claim from an "is" claim"). Even if we grant Nietzsche the world is in constant flux and organized around master/slave dialectic (which he got from Hegel), that wouldn't give us any reason to affirm such a world or system as good or desirable just on account of it being natural. In the end, he writes about his subjective preferences and makes a case why someone should care about them any more than someone else's preferences ("I like banana therefore banana good therefore everyone should eat banana"). No attempt at justified true belief there.
I always like how they tried to spin the fact that he was a C student into a win.
He wasn't a C student -- he was an A+ student.
Newtonian gave way to Einsteinian which gave way to Quantum which gave way to String which is giving way..... each one debunked in some way by skeptics.
Einstein was not even the first to present 'his' theory to the science world. He was made into a 'Mr. Science' and discoveries continued.
The materialist answers are championed by science and the pseudo-mysticism, abstraction and speculation are shared with modern religion. Each attempt to cross into the other's supposed territory and conduct war on Truth. They should get a room and 'reason together' with both eyes open but they're enemies and binoculars are useless to the Cyclops. Two thieves on either side of the cross. The symbol of that coming to an end just occurred, but 'they know not what they do.'
Why were Prometheus and Vulcan gods characters representative of science?
The science world was willing to be wrong, and openly discuss back then. The communication among greats was very high.
The science world has always had its civil wars while fighting another with non-science. What's being foisted publicly today is not science, I'll agree. Not knowing how and why science and religion choose 'sides' to one thing is the issue, and presages a coming 'crusade' to decide since minds are warped beyond reason.
They accept grants that have the required results written right in them. Academia has fallen long ago.
So is OP on the side of "scientific consensus" with this post? It only takes one man to be right, no matter how many prestigious German scientists think he is wrong.
"Everything I've been told/red is a lie or a hoax". This is how they muddy the waters and generate confusion and paranoid levels of skepticism. Seems like an MK Ultra drummed up psy op.
Flat Earth is dumb and easily disproven, viruses are a hoax because they've never been proven to exist scientifically, I'm not sure why nuclear explosions would be a hoax but it's possible and the sun could be a star like other stars or it could be in a category of its own (I believe it's the second).
And as you've thoroughly demonstrated the education system has failed.
Flat Earth was a psyop by the CIA put on 4xhan to capture idiots such as yourself, it's a mid wit net.
u/#crazy
Stop suffering.
https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/2016/07/toronto-cn-tower-from-olcott-ny.html?m=1
"as the curve of the earth doesn't care if their are mountains, lake, oceans"
The curve creates a "mountain" relative to a straight line plane. That's what you're seeing blocking the bottom of CN Tower.
"You understand, put a bunch of dirt of a ball, still curves about the same, right?"
You have a big eye ball compared to the ball. If your eyeball was the size of a grain of dirt, placing another grain of dirt beside it would block your view. You would be seeing a wall, i.e. 90% "curvature".
But your eyeball is nothing compared to the distances you're observing here, so your comparison is stupid.
The author is just explaining why his calculations are slightly off because he doesn't know the elevation height. Which does matter. You ever been on a mountain with telescope?
"Refraction will artificially make the horizon to appear lower than it is."
Yes, but that doesn't work in your favor. For in reducing the horizon, you elevate the object sitting behind it.
Refraction is literally the only thing that allows us to sneak past a "corner", so to speak. The "corner" is that mountain of water.
More refraction? Sun sets later. Less refraction? Sun sets earlier.
Likewise, refraction would enable us to see the base of CN Tower better, not worse.
And if the CN tower was moving away from us, then we'd see it longer, thanks to refraction.
On a flat earth, objects don't disappear behind a horizon. If you move away from CN Tower, it would keep getting smaller and smaller. On a spherical earth, the CN tower would start disappearing bottom-up and getting smaller.
Perspectives don't cause things to disappear. The "mountain" growing between you and the CN tower is what is obstructing the view. The "mountain" is the curvature of the Earth.
"after about 100 feet, you will notice their feet aren't visible."
As his feet get smaller it's hard to distinguish them from the ground. Use binoculars, and you will have no problem.
It's not belief. It's observation.
Perspective doesn't cause dipping below horizon.
If you get far enough away, things get squished into the horizon, which make them hard to see, but they don't disappear below.
This flat earth stuff is just rhetorical mumbo jumbo.
Aether, and the Michealson Morely experiment belong with this. Laird Stanton did a podcast interview on it long ago.
They couldn't refute his work so they attacked his character, pseudo scientists are not above ad hominem attacks. As the pseudo scientists amongst us have demonstrated with their down votes
Eishtein is easily refutable scientifically.
Basically with special relativity he tried to present Lorenz transform used to compensate for effect of using slow electromagnetic waves (light) for observation of objects moving with comparable speed as some fundamental law of nature.
If you will use sound to observe some events, you will get exactly same Lorenz transforms to adjust your observations, but with speed of sound instead of speed of light in formulas. This absolutely does not prove that speed of sound is maximum possible speed, that nothing could move faster that speed of sound and that there will be some casuality paradoxes for objects moving faster speed of sound.
With general relativity he again stretched distortions of observation using electromagnetic waves (light) as fundamental laws of nature.
In both cases it was like somebody will pose distortions observer see through rough glass not to the glass used for observation, but to fundamental laws of nature of how things happen in reality.
He got Nobel prize for photoeffect explanation, not for his relativity garbage. And even in that case, this work was done by his wife. That is why he gave all money from Nobel prize to her, despite being separated for a long time, in the fear that she will be able to prove her authorship.
Whole Einshtein saga was the first strike on the human development in an attempt to stop it in science and technology area. Damage inflicted by Einshtein marketing and his religious sect was devastating. Whole areas of scientific research are still cancelled by Einshtein worshipping crowd and those who try to break through this artificial taboos heavily attacked by character. Well-known examples are Gunter Nimtz with his experimentally proven FTL signal transmission, that guys who are studing Casimir cavity as tool for distorting space and many others. All of them attacked personally, using Einshtein dogmas as absolute argument of that scientists personal evilness and stupidity.
Einshtein relativity bullshit is used as undisputable dogma, which is by itself is a proof that Einshtein is not a genius, but a tool to interfere with scientific process. No research that contradicts Einshtein bullshit will be ever accepted, not even talking about funancing by current science elite crowd. It comes up to political leadership that provide state financing for scientific research too. Einshtein cult could have been prevented, if only scientists at the time had balls to stand against Jewish crowd that organized Einshtein advertising company al all levels, from MSM and governments to schools and universities at the time.
I guarantee you that there will be no any scientific or technological breakthroughs until all Einshtein dogmas along with his cultists will be erased from scientific field entirely and measures taken to prevent alike things in future.
Exactly.
Funny that NTP protocol and correspondent utilities every sigle second ruins that stupid assumption that you could not synchronize two clocks being apart. :)
Do they? Or they was just indoctrinated since childhood to picture a "scientist" as "eccentric genius"? And then, all they need is to place prepared puppets.
The "eccentric genius" trope is older than that and it spans not just science but other fields like art. It was mostly an organic outgrow of the Enlightenment/Romantic worldview of the 18-19c. It sure was weaponized to serve the scientismo narrative pushed by general education and pop culture in the 20th century though.
Yes. that is why Einshtein easily fit in that trope.
May be even earlier, down to Dark ages, when any smart enough person risked to be declared a witcher or insane.
What have you invented?
"Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself; but talent instantly recognizes genius." Arthur Conan Doyle
Could be right and it could be wrong. What society or mainstream history labels genius is not always real genius. There's a lot of myth creation and PR involved in these matters.
There is indeed for those incapable of grasping what is being discussed.
"Genius is making complex ideas simple, not making simple ideas complex."
"Genius abhors consensus because when consensus is reached, thinking stops. Stop nodding your head."
Albert Einstein
"Genius is making complex ideas simple, not making simple ideas complex."
Depends on context. As far as art is concerned it works both ways because life itself is both infinitely simple and infinitely complex.
There's shades between those two extremes that make this a beautiful adventure. For example if you knew nothing of art would you consider this Jackson Pollock and this Vincent Van Gogh expressing the same depth of emotion? or as it appears to me is it completely subjective to each person what moves them? I don't know what infinitely simple or infinitely complex means because infinite is a word used to describe something literally beyond our comprehension.
Are you saving time using acronyms or is that literally how you remember popular expressions?
A wall of completely mediocre gibberish.
"One hundred years ago, on May 29, 1919, astronomers observed a total solar eclipse in an ambitious effort to test Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity by seeing it in action. Essentially, Einstein thought space and time were intertwined in an infinite “fabric,” like an outstretched blanket. A massive object such as the Sun bends the spacetime blanket with its gravity, such that light no longer travels in a straight line as it passes by the Sun."
Fucking Idiot
So, you are unable to understand long enough explanations,
They observed using electromagnetic waves (light) with limited speed and subject to gravitation that causes different distortions in observations.
Distortions in observations that caused by use of relatively slow (in scale of universe) electromagnetic waves (light) for making observations does not mean that Einshtein bullshit is real.
To get rid of all that effects scientists just need to use some other means of observation, with speed many times more than speed of light and less subjected to universe obstacles. But fucking Einshtein worshippers prohibit and cancel any research that does not align with Eihshtein perverted "theory", including research for finding faster than light means to receive and transmit information.
There is no any scientific proof that gravity is a spacetime distortion. There is proof that mass bent light (electromagnetic waves). There could be many different theories, including simple ones like that if energy is one of manifestation of mass (or mass is manifestation of energy) so energy should gravitationally interact with mass too. But all other theories just prohibited by Einshtein sect to cancel humanity technological progress, f.e. in development of antigravity devices.
Also, spacetime curvature as gravity is not Einshtein idea at all. It was Henri Poincare who invented that concept (along with E=mc² connection of mass and energy, meanwhile), in attempt to explain gravity. Funny that Einshtein openly acknowledged Poincare contribution in his general relativity writings, but did it only posthumously to esure that Poincare will not rise question of authorship. Fucking jewish thief.
PS: Link to NASA speaks a lot. :)
And they blatantly lie about using Einshtein bullshit in GPS system. GPS was basically designed so that any presumable Einshtein bullshit effects are irrelevant because military didn't want to risk with expensive project if Einshtein was wrong. GPS is differential system, not absolute, so any potential "relativity" effects just cancel itself out. In no way GPS (and other GNSS systems) is using anything from "relativity". Just because it is not necessary.
"Indeed, in 1900 the ubiquitous Henri Poincaré stated that if one required that the momentum of any particles present in an electromagnetic field plus the momentum of the field itself be conserved together, then Poynting’s theorem predicted that the field acts as a “fictitious fluid” with mass such that E = mc2. Poincaré, however, failed to connect E with the mass of any real body." Source
Yeah bitch NASA You know headed by that Nazi cunt Wernher von Braun who would hang the five slowest Jews weekly in his Berlin rocket factory. A Nazi God to you simple fucks.
Because Einshtein worshippers said that? :) It is absolutely impossible if somebody ended with E=mc² formula and subbenly didn't have any thoughts about connection of mass with energy. On;y complete idiot could believe that having E=mc² Poincare "failed to connect" something. He was not as dumb as Einshtein.
How interesting, that nearly all of your "Nazi cunts" always eventually ended working for Jews. Werner von Braun who ended working for disgusting Jews in control of USA at that time is not an exception.
Are they really "Nazi cunts"? Does "Nazi" really means antisemitic? Why your "Nazi" never destroyed any Jewish state and never threaten any Jewish business? Why Nazi always work only for Jewish benefits, from Third Reich to modern Ukraine?
In any case it is inevitable that Einshtien cult will be destroyed and all that Jewish science-like cabal will be buried in oblivion. It's just a matter of time. In the best case, Einshtein will be mentioned in one row with Judas and Trotsky, as one of the greatesrt enemies of humanity.
Poincaré, however, failed to connect E with the mass of any real body.
Fuck. Another one who doesn't understand the words they use. Impossible? What fuckin world do you live in? Improbable maybe but doubtful
Why do you think that something written in MSM is true? Scientific American is a shitty science-like MSM who wrote a lot about climatehoax, vaccinehoax, coonahoax and other hoaxes. Why wouldn't they support einshteinhoax?
If your common sense (if you have any) could be so easily shut down by some shit printed in MSM, you are doomed.
It's fascinating, really. Scientist, who derived some very interesting formula, deny to analyse it in depth for all possible deductions and physical meanings. :) You definitely have to be completely retarded or indoctrinated to believe that crap.