Relativity - The Fools Gold of Physics

Relativity - The Fools Gold of Physics

I want you to admire something.
If only for just one moment out of your day.

You might not know it from looking... but a great amount of work and engineering was put into that shiny sphere.
And they said it couldn’t be done!

You know what you’re looking at?

....... it’s a TURD! A fking Turd...
You just admired a Polished Turd.

Now that you know it’s a ball of crap... you can sit back and realize how ridiculous it is, right?
And when you watch other people “ooo and ahhh” at it... you chuckle because you know what it is.

But at first glance... someone with a confident approach convinced you that what you are looking at has value.
And because a lot of work was put into it... they convinced you it should be admired and studied. “A work of art.”

This is how I feel about Relativity and Einstein’s model of Light and Gravity.

It has been packaged so well over the years... people are oblivious to the fact that it’s a TURD!
If you are raised on crap from the day you are born... then that will be your baseline for life.
And it will be very difficult to change your baseline. People are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to attend “prestigious” universities that are teaching/peddling pure garbage. People getting seriously into debt... to get a PhD focusing toward Relativity?!?

Sometimes PhD can stand for Permanent Head Damage:

Psychologically, people will violently defend what they first encounter. Even if what they first encounter is wrong. If someone grows up being taught about Edison... they will dismiss Nikola Tesla as “some guy.”

If someone grows up being taught 1+1=3 ... they will argue with you to the death even though 1+1=2. You will have to go through great lengths to
Un-brainwash someone who has been taught incorrectly from the start.

If individuals grew up with a well packaged and convincing argument, from people they trust, then those individuals WILL defend what they’ve “known” their whole life.
Especially when everyone else around them is raised the same too. At least 3 Generations deep.
Reinforces that first information you encountered.
He who wins the wars writes the history books... (and science books)...
The gatekeepers have had the luxury of teaching generations worth of people incorrectly just to preserve their own bias and fraudulent status quo.

Most people are not aware there are credible and formidable challenges to Relativity. From Nobel laureates, PhD holding professionals and recognized giants in the scientific community over the last 100 years. Right along side of every claim, headline and prediction made for relativity... there were more accurate predictions and claims made in plasma physics labs which were willfully ignored.

Most people do not know that Eddington sent a second expedition on May 29, 1919, to take pictures of the solar eclipse from a different location. Eddington sent his second expedition to Brazil. His Brazilian team had 15 inch telescopes. But the heat in Brazil slightly warped the housings.
So Eddington refused to acknowledge the data collected from the Brazilian team. Which showed calculations closer to newtons model. But Eddington was an Einstein fanboy and zealot. So he declared Einstein correct overnight that relativity was proved true from the solar eclipse picture.

But notice there is no distortion of the light or stars. Just that the stars change their position. Like a straw bending in water. The straw does not distort but only seems to change position AT the meniscus.

Eddington's Brazilian team tried to challenge Eddington's results, but he wouldn't have any of it. Eddington fudged his own data and refused to acknowledge his own teams calculations and information. It became buried overnight and his own team was silenced. Here we are today.

THIS is the image Eddington touted as the end all be all Proof of Relativity. Behold...

Important take-aways highlighted from the above article:

"... when that star was just visible AT THE LIMB OF THE SUN."
Not above the sun... not around the sun.... ONLY DIRECTLY AT THE MENISCUS.
Like a straw bending in water. The straw does not progressively bend more and more as it approaches the meniscus. And does not distort. Only seems to change position because of the refractive index of the medium.

"By the 1960's most physicists accepted the ASSUMPTIONS that Einstein’s prediction of how much light would SUPPOSED TO BE deflected." (But Not how much it actually IS deflected. Since the deflection ONLY happens directly AT the solar limb.)

Einstein apparently wasn't prepared to be proven incorrect. His perspective is faith based since he argued that even if evidence disproves his model... he would continue to believe it anyway. That is dogma and the beginnings of a cult.
Despite the inconsistencies and contrary evidence.. they sweep it under the rug and announce themselves to be correct.

Shutting out all dissension under the guise of "you don't know what you're talking about”, and dismiss you saying to “just read a physics book." (Well... I did.. many. and compared their contradictions and flaws.)

There can be no refraction if there is no medium. Which is why there is no light bending above the limb, in the corona or in the void. But Relativity says light SHOULD bend above the limb, in the corona and in the void.
So they MUST invoke “gravity/space curvature” as bending the light since mainstream solar theory teaches outdated nonsense regarding the composition of the Sun.

But visible light has never been bent above the limb EVER in the history of astrophysics or satellite imagery.

They teach there are NO liquids, NO solids to the sun. NO surface whatsoever, NO meniscus, NO definitive boundary at all. Pretty much teach the sun is a 100% hollow ball of gas.. 100% gaseous plasma. And any surface or boundary that you think you see - They say is just an illusion. (They are so used to polished turds... they can’t tell the glimmer of real gold)

People acknowledge the states of matter: Solid, liquid, gas, plasma.

People acknowledge that when gases compress, it makes a liquid.

People acknowledge the existence of liquid metallic hydrogen.

People acknowledge the existence of liquid metallic hydrogen in so called "gas giants" like Jupiter and Saturn.
(which means gas giants don't exist since they contain liquid)

People acknowledge there is more pressure in the Sun than there is in Jupiter or Saturn.

But mainstream scientists cannot make the leap to apply their own logic and physics to the sun in regards to compressing hydrogen until it forms a condensed matter lattice or liquid. Why the disconnect from reality?

Liquid metallic hydrogen flows in convection currents which generate massive solar magnetic fields. The liquid metallic hydrogen acts like a super conductor. The gaseous plasma SURROUNDING the liquid metallic hydrogen has a refractive index which fooled Eddington and everyone else who hadn’t yet learned of the existence of LMH.

If a star contains liquid - Gravitational collapse becomes impossible since liquids and solids are stable. The only reason why gravitational collapse is Allowed is because of the 100% gaseous plasma model.
And gravitational lensing can be explained through refraction within plasma. (as seen through microwaves from radio quasar sources deflecting AT the meniscus of the sun at exactly 1.752 arcseconds.) ONLY at 1 solar radii.

Astrophysical Evidence Shows No Direct Interaction Between Gravitation and Electromagnetism:

https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of-spie/7421/1/Astrophysical-evidence-shows-no-direct-interaction-between-gravitation-and-electromagnetism/10.1117/12.824116.short?SSO=1

From Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille

Same information from yet another source, R.C. Gupta:

This one picture does away with the entire conventional/ standard gas ball model of the Sun:

Transverse ripples can ONLY happen in a liquid or condensed matter. NOT a gas. When you throw a pebble in a pond, the ripple propagates outward as an expanding ring. (It’s actually an expanding sphere, but you are only seeing a cross-section of the equator of the expanding sphere. Being exposed by the meniscus of liquid)

Spherical Propagation of Light:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/jason-verbelli/the-propagation-speed-of-light/10156524123608310/

Blow a cloud of smoke and wave your hand through it. Shake it with bass.
In no scenario in the history of science will a transverse ripple expand outward in a gas. Only longitudnal shockwaves propagate Through a gas. Gases cannot sustain transverse ripples. Only at the surface/meniscus/definitive boundary of a liquid.

The current gas ball model of the sun violates laws of thermodynamics and known physics. It’s not gravity that bends light which shifted the position of stars on May 29th, 1919... It was an observation of refraction within plasma.

Everything wrong with the Standard Solar Model (SkyScholar on YouTube)
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL7QIOZteWPpBWBOl8i0e-g/videos

"The Sun cannot be a gas. The gaseous model is proven false by the Sun's thermal spectrum alone. Only condensed matter emits a thermal spectrum. Gases cannot do so because they do not have a lattice structure. Furthermore, in the lectures above, the theoretical pillar of gaseous stars is Eddington's mass-luminosity relation.

But Eddington's mass-luminosity relation is false because it violates the laws of thermodynamics. It equates a collection of terms that, combined, are not intensive to temperature, which IS intensive. Temperature must always be intensive otherwise it's a violation of thermodynamics.

A vibrational lattice is required to produce a thermal spectrum.
Only condensed matter has a vibrational lattice. (In this regard, it is important to realize that Kirchhoff's Law of Thermal Emission is false and, consequently, Planck's equation for thermal spectra is not universal.
Thus Planck's said equation reveals the temperature of the emitter only in the case of an actual blackbody like carbon.

Otherwise, the temperature extracted from Planck's equation is only apparent (it's not the temperature of anything.
Finally, it is relevant to note that the stellar mass-luminosity relation so prized by astronomy, is invalid. Because it too equates temperature to a combination of terms that are not intensive; thereby, violating the 0th Law and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics." -- Stephen Crothers

SAFIRE Project PDF of 2018 Test Results:
Producing energy equal to the sun from 1800 watts.
The surface of the electrode is 1000 degrees K. Outside the plasma shells is 500 degrees K.
But trapped in the layers of plasma are temperatures equal to about 3,000,000 million degrees K.
(Like creating stable energy equal to a nuclear bomb but without the radiation)
Each concentric shell independently rotates and also alternates in polarity.
Noteworthy pages: 3, 4, 8, 16, 18- 24, 33 - 42, 45 - 61, 66, 67
http://safireproject.com/ewExternalFiles/SAFIRE-Project-Report.pdf

Evolution of the SAFIRE Project:
https://www.electricuniverse.info/safire-project/?fbclid=IwAR1pKuqJduvtwU2nMw37j-FxGNLtF9wjuw_iG64ljyYRHE5rUS_c2iGGAto

SAFIRE Project 2018:

Sun is Not A Gaseous Plasma:

Sun on Trial:

40 Lines of Evidence the Sun is Condensed Matter, not “hollow with no surface.”
http://www.ptep-online.com/2013/PP-35-16.PDF

Dr. Pierre-Marie Robitaille Papers:
http://vixra.org/author/pierre-marie_robitaille

HoloScience Links:
https://www.holoscience.com/wp/links/

Eddington's Brazilian team argued against Einstein's model but their challenges went ignored.
Along with many other plasma physicists and Real scientists.
Remember... if Any of these 3 concepts had an alternative explanation.. Relativity proves to be invalid (by Einstein's own words)

For an eloquent (and easy to understand) presentation on this subject (from an ex-NASA physicist and internationally recognized laser/optics/satellite expert), look up the video on YouTube titled: "Can Stars BEND LIGHT? General Relativity and Gravity with Dr. Edward Dowdye!"

Visit his site and scrutinize the equations and material for yourself.
http://www.extinctionshift.com

"Dr. Edward Dowdye obtained his B.S. in Mathematics, Electronics Technology and Physics from Hampton University in 1967. He then completed a Diplom-Atomphysik (Atomic Physics) at the Physikalisches Institut der Universität Heidelberg in Germany, specializing in Nuclear Magnetic Resonance on free atoms and ions in confined plasma vessels to determine optical resonance of free ions.
He did further studies in Astronomy and Astrophysics at Universität Heidelberg. Eventually, Dr. Dowdye was awarded a grant from the Preparing Future Faculty Program at Howard University in Washington, DC, where he obtained the Ph.D. in Laser Spectroscopy Physics at the Laser Spectroscopy Laboratory, supported by the Center for the Study of Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial Atmospheres, a research effort supported by NASA.
Dr. Dowdye has taught Physics at Lincoln and Cheyney Universities in Pennsylvania, Marymount University in Northern Virginia, and Southeastern and Howard Universities in Washington, DC.
He instructed Experimental Physics and served as a mentor for German graduate students while pursuing the degree Diplom Atomphysik at Universität Heidelberg in Germany. "

Dr. Dowdye's approach shows there can be No direct link between gravitation and electromagnetism.

Real Math and Physics:
http://www.extinctionshift.com/short_present/ViewGraph_English.pdf

Significant Findings (8 Pages):
http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings.htm

Willfully dismissing the work of Dr. Edward Dowdye while continuing to believe in curved space and gravitational lensing is akin to Flat Earthers dismissing Geodesy.
People who believe Relativity where light follows the curvature of space around a dense body also believe space is flat in between those dense bodies.
I call those people Flat Spacers. Earth is not flat and neither is space.
Space is not a "thing" that curves or distorts or is flat or warps or bends, etc.
This is a logical fallacy of reification. Trying to apply physical attributes to an abstract idea.
Might as well anthropomorphize space too.

Dr. Dowdye’s approach does away with need for relativistic corrections or even Aether.
Replaces Doppler Shift, relativistic mass, gravitational lensing, time dilation and more.
Corrects the interpretation of the Sagnac Effect.
Accurately predicts nullified experiments in optics, perihelion of mercury, invariance of wave using galilean transformations, problems with convection of waves in refracting media, solution to PSR1913+16 binary pulsar perihelion and more.

Questioning Relativity (FAQs)
http://www.extinctionshift.com/FAQ.htm

Differences between Relativity and Extinction Shift/ Galilean Transformations

Ron Hatch is another man who challenges relativity. He is a recognized expert for 50 years and partial inventor of GPS itself. Ron authored a book titled Escape from Einstein which details misconceptions of GPS showing relativity is not involved whatsoever. https://www.gps.gov/governance/advisory/members/hatch/

“Perhaps you've already heard that GPS, by the very fact that it Works, confirms Einstein's relativity; also that Black Holes must be real. But these are little more than popular fictions, according to the distinguished GPS expert Ron Hatch.
Here Ron describes GPS data that refute fundamental tenets of both the Special and General Relativity theories.
The same experimental data, he notes, suggests an absolute frame with only an appearance of relativity.

Ron has worked with satellite navigation and positioning for 50 years, having demonstrated the Navy's TRANSIT System at the 1962 Seattle World's Fair. He is well known for innovations in high-accuracy applications of the GPS system including the development of the "Hatch Filter" which is used in most GPS receivers.
He has obtained over two dozen patents related to GPS positioning and is currently a member of the U.S National PNT (Positioning Navigation and Timing) Advisory Board. He is employed in advanced engineering at John Deere's Intelligent Systems Group.”

Dr. Edward Dowdye again.
http://www.extinctionshift.com/details06.htm

Understanding Gravitational Potential Gradient and Atomic Clocks:
http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings08_C.htm

Flawed Teachings:
http://www.extinctionshift.com/ObservationsFundamentalsFlawedTeaching.htm

Halton Arp and Hannes Alfven are two more internationally recognized giants in the scientific community who challenged Relativity.

Halton Arp Articles:
http://haltonarp.com/articles

Intrinsic Red Shift with Halton Arp:

Hannes Alfven:
http://plasmauniverse.info/people/alfven.html

In the 1980's, Halton Arp catalogued quasars and "peculiar galaxies". Showed how galactic magnetic fields were aligning the quasars over vast distances. NASA replied with a quote that magnetic fields don't exist in space. That there was no evidence. Well... turns out...

Mainstream is slowly catching up in some aspects:
Michigan Institute reveals Parker Satellite Mystery about Sun's Heating:
https://news.umich.edu/solving-the-suns-super-heating-mystery-with-parker-solar-probe/

For a huge compilation of credible challenges to Relativity, the standard solar model, light, gravity and a list of REAL Scientists... go through this compilation album called Flaws and Corrections: https://www.facebook.com/verbelli/media_set?set=a.10156179333643302&type=3

I also put many of the images in a 22 minute video slideshow with classical music:

Addressing the center of galaxy and lack of lensing:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AN....328..186D

14 Years of Time Resolved Images observing Sagittarius A - Collected at the Max Planck Institute and other international observatories. No lensing whatsoever:
http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings08.htm

Again, on the left is what Relativity assumes we SHOULD see. How Relativity is PORTRAYED in textbooks and universities. Non-existent space curvature/ distortion/ warping/ bending. Never been observed in the history of astrophysics or satellite imagery.
But on the right is what is actually observed in reality.
http://extinctionshift.com/book_synopsis.htm

Yet "experts" will fight you to the death that "space curvature" and distortion is real.
Even though there is not one piece of evidence. Only artist interpretations, CGI, computer graphics and cartoons.
While everyone "ooo's and aaah's" at the special effects from the movie Interstellar, you can sit back and chuckle.
Knowing its a giant CGI ball of crap.

Here are a couple images touted as being examples of gravitational lensing.
These type of examples are shown in physics courses, texts and PDFs from astrophysicists claiming lensing.
http://www.extinctionshift.com/SignificantFindings08_B.htm

But they only show Radio, Microwave or X-Ray wavelengths. Which show a forward light scattering effect.
Like a camera artifact or glare, but only in 1 particular wavelength.
So when they switch spectral filters, the same effect isn't there anymore.
But according to Relativity, gravitational lensing should happen EQUALLY in ALL wavelengths.
So, their images should look the same throughout all spectral filters. It doesn't at all. No lensing to be seen ever in visible light spectrum.

Cannot pick and choose which wavelengths get bent while all others do not. And then only show the couple examples to try and validate your stance. And ONLY at the solar plasma limb while claiming it happens according to the inverse square away from a body... yet showing no examples in the history of astrophysics and all of science.

The point is that... not all that glitters is gold. Relativity is obfuscation of logic and science.
People are so used to crap covered in sparkly foil, they don’t know gold when they encounter it.
So when they encounter real gold... they nonchalantly toss it aside like trash. How ironic.

Replace the “Sun God” with Relativity...
All hail Ra! Here Ye, Here Ye:

It’s like someone who believes in Santa Claus.
And they take a picture of a streak of light during a meteor shower.
Then tout their picture as “proof” of their entire theory that Santa is real.
Arrogantly stating... “What?!... you can plainly see the streak of light... therefore it validates my perspective.”
Not considering there are other more logical explanations for the same observation.

Relativity is like the Pied Piper within a hierarchy of scientific dogma.
Or like the Emperor's New Clothes. Only "the smart" people can see that lensing in the visible light spectrum above the sun. Only the smart people can interpret the equations and scenarios for you.
(Like a Mayan priest interpreting solar eclipses for Their mental slaves/ citizens.)
Down the chain the info goes until the public eats it up.
The Dunning-Kruger like confidence exuded by Relativists is astounding.

Grow up on relativity... and by the time you encounter plasma physics, the truth will seem bitter and too hard to swallow.
Relativity = A Polished Turd/ Santa Claus/ Fools Gold

Plasma Physics > Relativity

If Einstein were alive today... even he would be disgusted at how his work has been hoisted to an infallible pedestal of unfalsifiable Psyence.

Einstein might have been a genius...
But Nikola Tesla was a Wise Man.

List of Wise men can be found in the Compilation Album called “Flaws and Corrections”: https://www.facebook.com/verbelli/media_set?set=a.10156179333643302&type=3

Tesla on Relativity:
"On a body as large as the sun, it would be impossible to project a disturbance of this kind [e.g., radio broadcasts] to any considerable distance except along the surface. It might be inferred that I am alluding to the curvature of space supposed to exist according to the teachings of relativity, but nothing could be further from my mind. I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved, is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view." – Nikola Tesla

By 1916, Einstein had replaced the old ether in his theory of General Relativity with "curved space-time" itself. Only, this new ‘ether’ is no longer a medium in three-dimensional Euclidean space, but in four-dimensional non-Euclidean (curved) space-time.” It was this idea that was completely unacceptable to Tesla, and he criticized Einstein in the 1930s because of it.

To Tesla, "The Theory of Relativity is just a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense. The theory wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying error. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are meta-physicists rather than scientists.”

Writing a decade before the explosion of the atom bomb, and ignoring the space curvature data from the 1919 eclipse which supported Einstein’s idea that space was curved around large bodies such as stars, Tesla suggested that the existence of a force field would account for the same mathematical results. Thus, Tesla brazenly concluded, “Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved." (Tesla's quote is still correct today!)

“My second discovery was of a physical truth of the greatest importance. As I have searched the entire scientific records in more than a half dozen languages for a long time without finding the least anticipation, I consider myself the original discoverer of this truth, which can be expressed by the statement: There is no energy in matter other than that received from the environment." -- Nikola Tesla

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.” -- Nikola Tesla

Here is a short talk by Hannes Alfven back in 1982 at the Lindau Nobel Lauerate Meeting.
https://www.mediatheque.lindau-nobel.org/videos/31429/how-space-research-changes-our-view-of-the-universe-1982/meeting-1982

In 1979, Hannes Alfven gave a presentation on ”Observations and Cosmology”.
In his talk, he rejected the Big Bang theory and instead advocated a model of the Universe symmetric in matter and anti-matter. In 1982 he went back to Lindau, this time with a more general lecture title about space research and its results.

In particular he wanted to describe the implications for cosmology of the discoveries made in 25 years of space research. The talk ends by giving as advise to the young 500 students in the audience:
"Don’t go for a curriculum of General Relativity but chose Plasma Physics instead!"

"If the velocity of light is only a tiny bit dependent on the velocity of the light source, then my whole theory of Relativity and Gravitation is false." -- {Quotation of Albert Einstein from a letter to Erwin Finley-Freundlich: August 1913}

Well... turns out.. the speed of light IS dependent upon the speed of the light source.
Illusions aplenty.

Spherical Propagation of Light:
https://steemit.com/science/@verbz/the-spherical-propagation-varying-speed-s-of-light

There is A LOT more! But if you went through all those links, sources and info... and you STILL believe Relativity is a better explanation than Plasma Physics, Galilean Transformations and the alternatives... then...