kvs on Thu Feb 27, 2020 3:52 pm

Einstein personality cult.

Some facts to consider about the "all time genius":

1) His 1905 paper on Special Relativity has zero references. That such a paper was published indicates corruption by the editors.

Poincare published extensively on this very subject, including the Lorentz transform and E=mc2 before Einstein. But Einstein

does not give any credit to Lorentz and to Poincare and others who were covering the same material in a non-trivial way. I am

not talking about hints of similarity, I am talking about core features of the theory. Poincare even included relativity in

the title of his theory and identified the growth of inertia as the speed of light is approached and that the speed of light

was the limit in all inertial frames.

The norm for scientific publications is to do a literature search and that has been true sine well before 1900. Einstein's SR

paper was not publishable since he was ignoring previous research and taking credit for it. Some time later Einstein gave some

credit to Lorentz but kept ignoring Poincare. Some will claim that SR is a deep insight by Einstein. That is BS since SR

naturally pops out of the Maxwell Electro-Magnetic equations since they are invariant under Lorentz transforms. That is,

inertial frames which are governed by Maxwell's equations (forget about gravity and general relativity for now) transform

via the equations of Lorentz. These transforms are substantially different from the Gallilean transforms of Newtonian physics,

and automatically include length contraction, time dilation and failure of simultaneity.

For petty career and ego reasons scientists have been trying to pretend that they discovered SR when it has emerged from

empirical observations. SR does not belong to Einstein.

2) Eddington, staged what amounts to a hoax by claiming to have measured refraction of light around the Sun "proving"

General Relativity during eclipse events in Africa in 1919. This data was totally cherry picked and he was claiming

a measurement accuracy 200 times larger than was possible with his cameras. This farce was popularized in the press and

turned Einstein into a celebrity overnight. The so-called three tests of GR do not prove its validity. There are an

infinite number of theories including quantizable field theories that can reproduce all three tests but do not agree

with GR.

In the case of GR, Einstein can be given the credit. But he never put his foot down when his theory was abused. It

is actually sad to see his 1939 paper totally ignored while the joke by Schneider and Oppenheimer from 1939 extolled

as proof that GR allows black hole solutions. The latter paper used an unphysical stress-energy tensor which totally

ignored radiation pressure to get their result. If they had accounted for any radiation pressure, they would never

have obtained any solution forming a horizon. The proper stress-energy tensor for a perfect fluid is

(rho + p) U^iU^j - p g^{ij}

(beware a lot of references ignore the minus sign in the second term and are thus engaged in voodoo mathematics).

This stress-energy tensor can be adapted to the "collapsing dust" case of Schneider and Oppenheimer (1939) since

even a tiny radiation pressure from the dust (which is supposed to be like the galaxies in the universe) produces

a strong negative feedback on the metric (g) curvature. As the mass gathers in progression to infinite density,

it starts to form a horizon-like amplification of the radial prefactor, B(r):

g = A(r)dt^2 - B(r)dr^2 - C(r)d(omega)^2

For the black hole solution B(r) is infinity at the horizon radius (r_s). This infinity just does not pop out of

nowhere. It must form. Here is where the radiation pressure comes in. The -p B(r) term in the stress-energy

tensor will start to explode even if p is very small. Since this term acts to damp the formation of infinite density

it is clearly acting to suppress the formation of any event horizon. As long as there is any radiation pressure,

the horizon will fail to form for the dust system of Schneider and Oppenheimer. In the case of a collapsing

star a similar resistance develops, but we are dealing with a compact object and not dispersed dust. For a star

the pressure of the fluid (star material) acts as a positive term in terms of gravity. So it can theoretically

overcome the radiation pressure. But there is a rub in this logic.

In his 1939 paper Einstein identified an ultra-important physical aspect. Any BH collapse with the formation of

a horizon requires matter to travel at the speed of light at the horizon. This means that mass turns into a photon

gas at and inside the horizon. So we really need to know what happens to regular matter as the horizon starts to

emerge. If the matter dissociates into photons before an actual singularity of B(r_s) forms, then we have a

strong negative feedback that suppresses the formation of both infinite density and any event horizon. Although

some state that is almost like a black hole can develop where we have a sphere of enormous density with an outer

thick shell where B(r) is also very large. For all intents and purposes no real black hole forms but a black object

does since any photons leaving this potential well will experience extreme red-shifting.