Don't miss new Big Think videos! Subscribe by clicking here: http://goo.gl/CPTsV5
We'll have to recalibrate everything -- the age of the universe, the age of stars, the distance to the stars, the basic structure of modern electronics, the GPS, nuclear weapons -- all of that would have to be recalibrated and rethought ...
Einstein's equation is right, only we calculate the speed of light with equipment thats build using the speed of light, for instance : The formula for time is: T (period) = 1 / f (frequency). λ =c / f = wave speed c (m/s) / frequency f (Hz). The unit hertz (Hz) was once
called cps = cycles per second where c = λ x f | λ = c/f | f = c/λ
Wouldn't it be because light beams interact with the atoms in the atmosphere (photons get absorbed and then reemitted in the same direction, thus making light "slow down" in the atmosphere) and neutrinos almost not? :I
It has been two years since I posted my ALTERNATIVE theory on the true nature of the speed of light and the argument as to why EINSTEIN was wrong about his arbitrary limitation on the speed of light. I theorized that there is an INVISIBLE portion of light which travels much faster than " C" but which we cannot detect or measure until it slows down to "C"
I have not seen even one rebuttal of my argument till now...because I believe that it is coherent, consistent, jives with the EVIDENCE and because it appeals to plain old COMMON SENSE. There is no " INVISIBLE " wall or barrier at the conventional speed of light " C " which prevents us from going through that arbitrary limitation...it is NONSENSE.
EINSTEIN had to include a COSMIC CONSTANT in his equations to make them coincide with reality but that factor is the mathematical equivalent of saying; " there is something in this equation which does not make sense...and I have to put in some extra extraneous component to make it work ".
C'MMON all you physicists and theoretical physicists out there...THINK ABOUT THIS ALTERNATIVE theory of mine'; does this theory make sense to you and can you ADD anything to it so we can ignore EINSTEIN on this subject and move forward with more certainty and confidence about our ability to engage in our inevitable exploration of the Universe ...or has EINSTEIN gonna keep us stuck here on Earth or in our solar system forever ?
Science is not always being right or supposed to be right all the time. It’s all about testing all theories, man can think about and will try to prove it. If Einstein was wrong, so what??? Every scientist does, but I’m not saying he could be wrong. Relativity is about matter, time, and space which needing more complex ideas and time.
Night is dark because of absence of light (photons) that we receive from sun. And it's cold because of absent of electromagnetic that we receive from sun. And night is happening since billions of years because of Earth Rotation Around the Sun.
Stop here. temperature and "warmer" are very very different from light, light is photons is has got nothing to do with temperature. Light is Light. Another thing the rotation of earth and its affects all the rays and particles and photons that come to us from the Sun. OK, if you have only philosophical fantasy theories keep it for yourself, if not just prove it and don't bother us.
I don’t believe this guy knows what he’s talking about u can’t time travel because just like as u approach the speed of light time goes slower but if u exceed the speed of light it just goes slower because just like 0+ u can’t reach 0.1 because it doesn’t exist
Just because something contradicts someone whos theories (Einstien) you based and manipulated your learning on and to doesnt make it wrong . Im sure someone will come along with theories that may well prove all your science wrong.. One such theory to contemplate is "why does a dog lick its nuts?" the simple answer is "because it can". Oh and by the way The GPS system has an intentional error built in by The US defence department
If Einstein is wrong, it would have to be extreme speed or condition. His theory can predict where Mercury will be in 100 years. Newton gravitational theory failed to do this. So if you were to build a spaceship to Mercury, you will rely on Einstein to be right for you to land your spaceship on Mercury. If you cling onto Newton, you will never land on Mercury. And if there is a new theory, it has reduce to Einstein general relativity for you to land your spaceship on Mercury.
If a relativistic system produced a result incompatible with relativity, then relativity falls.
However, if a relativistic system fucked up, then relativity falls.
Seems like the experiment never should have involved a relativistic system to begin with.
Of course he is wrong,i just cant imagine that mass becomes infinity with the approaching to speed of light,momentum sure but not mass.
When we were a child and told to lift 5 kg rice bag we wont be able to but in teens we can therefore we pushed our limits,so i cannot imagine that light speed is the limit of speed.
Most people in this section did not watch the video. They just read the title and projected their own opinions into the subject. Actually, Einstein was not wrong. The experiment that allegedly proved otherwise was.
I don't think that if Einstein was wrong. I think he did his best with whatever data he had his hands on back then. Of course he calculated it without complicated machines back then point being he was way way ahead of his time.
Idc if he wasn't perfect and made errors like 99% population of his time that never did anything useful what so ever.
I respect Einstein as much as I respect Tesla. Clearly, Einstien was a great person too idc about whatever politics was in play back then that made him famous and never talked about Tesla. Point being it doesn't change a thing about Einstien the great.
I saw some interesting articles that state after studying data from the last 400 years when the speed of light was 1st detected by roemer. There's evidence said the speed of light is slowing. If it's not constant after all what will that mean to physics? einstein technically was right, but maybe didn't factor in the entropy law of thermodynamics. Which states everything in the universe is systematically being broken down and all free energy will eventually be used up leaving no more heat and its game over. Everything in the universe including light is under entropy laws. So if universal free energy is diminishing would that not mean light is going to lessen as well, and it would have to of been faster in the past with more energy?. If it's TRUE will physics have to start over. Just an interesting thought, have to wait for further testing.
So fuck them all and leave them in past... what for is physicist if they cant use new experience?? Ya fuq you stupid consortium what kick out Pons.. Btw now.. WE know NEUTRINO NOW exist in 3 form Antineutrino neutrino and NEutrinos-TAU And yap one of them is faster than light,, DEAL with it,,! btw.. why is so hard accept not even TIMASPACE is not linear and dont have kinda known form or GRID,, is just bunch of mess.. Where is posibilities whyt we cant even imagine,, .. Being hurt by new experience?? No big deal.. Only strong survive,, And ya even Einstein say screw gravity is a bullshit,,,
Well to be honest if he was alive and he was truly incorrect he would love to make the changes to make it right.But thing is you cannot prove him wrong because he is the only person that understands the formulas
The proof for the existence for God, and how Einstein was wrong:
1) Inert elements (billiard balls, rocks, etc...) cannot move themselves. Fact.
2) If inert elements move, the requirement is that a force external to them must have exerted itself against them to cause them to move because they cannot move themselves. Fact.
3) If inert elements move into pattern, or patterns (especially if the patterns repeat and are predictable), the requirement is that the external force that moved them into the pattern must possess a consciousness in order to be 'aware' of what a pattern is, and how to manipulate inert elements into the pattern. Fact.
4) The inert atoms are the inert elements that are not only the building blocks of the physical universe, but have their movement remain within the parameters of the necessary singular order paradigm model that produces this universe of consistent, stable, predictable movement. The requirement is that there must be a consciousness within the external force that is controlling the atoms of the universe-God.
5) The atoms are also, in their movements, seen acting in ways that they should/could not themselves (aside from the fact that they are 'acting/moving in the first place.). The earth is resisting the sun's gravitational pull with it's repeating and constant elliptical orbit, something it should not be able to do. Or rotate on it's axis, or have a moon orbiting it that the earth should have pulled into it, or maintain it's tilt orientation throughout it's solar orbit.
All these things are impossible for an inert ball of atoms to be performing.
6) Hebrews 11:3 " Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen are not made of things that do appear." The table is made of things that do not appear. If they were invisible the table would be invisible, it is not. We know these thins are too small to see- atoms. The bible has been teaching us about atoms for over 2,000 years.
7) Genesis 2:7 " And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."
This is how we can think and speak within this body composed of inert atoms. The body isn't thinking.
Einstein's famous quote is "The most incomprehensible things about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
Einstein, lost in the academian science singularity of equations on the black board, could only ask the "How" the universe functioned logically, and comprehensibly, and not "Why" did it do so. The 'why' is what is important. Why inert atoms were moving at all, let alone in patterns.
If he asked why he would have had to conclude a thinking power must be controlling it all-God. But he could not.
The "Universal Laws of Physics" should be renamed the "Universal Laws of Physicists." because the stem from men who could not ask 'why'.
This is how Einstein was wrong, he could not consider the whole picture, therefore his 'science' was limited to the black board, and his attempting to find his "Grand Unifying Theory" where two plus six equaled everything.
Einstein was his own biggest critic. I absolutely abhor today's celebrity culture, no one can be wrong, must be given fake reinforcement. He tore up his own theories many times, comfort was no friend of a physicist.
What if Quantum Mechanics is wrong?..
Michio Kaku is an egomaniac and a fraud; he's copied Einstein's appearance and cashed in on it his whole life, and he even believes that he's a genius like Einstein (egomaniac).. Einstein went to his grave being quietly laughed at by his scientific peers because he never accepted QM theory. Einstein's famous line, "god doesn't play dice with the universe" was just one of his arguments against QM. The famous "Shroedinger's Cat" thought experiment was not a merely a description of QM, it was an attempt to show that it leads to a logical contradiction, and must therefore be false.
QM assumes that the fundamental building blocks of "matter" are particulate in nature (atoms), so therefore the fundamental building blocks of atoms must also be "matter", and particulate in nature. Electrons are not "particles", and neither are protons or neutrons; they are aspects of 3-D (maybe 4 or 5-D as well) "standing" electromagnetic waveforms. All attributes that we associate with "matter", like mass and momentum, can be explained as known aspects of geodesic "standing" em waveforms. The concept of "particle" is only useful above the atomic scale; in reality, atoms ain't solid, they only act like it..
This nicely explains both the harmonic (musical octaves) patterns in the periodic table as well as those same patterns within the atom. Nested platonic structures (Hydrogen being a tetrahedron, Helium being an octahedron, ) formed from 3-d standing em waves. Atoms connect at points (+1 bond), edges (+2 bond) and faces (+3 bonds) of these "platonic" or "buckminster" structures to form molecules, and that explains why the same structures occur within minerals, in an ever expanding fractal composed of these naturally stable (most efficient, structure of least resistance) geometric forms.