Does light bending doubly violate the equivalence

[/quote]
Hi Larry, I’ve been researching his early papers for some time, and there is quite an element of fantasy in them. He seems to have woven fantasy ideas in with some reality to come up with a surreal world of make-believe that a lot of people took seriously back then, mainly (it seems) because of the new advent of rather amazing breakthroughs in physics, such as with X-Rays (light that could travel through human skin to reveal a person’s bones) and radio waves (that could send the human voice around the world and penetrate solid walls of stone) . . . . . .

. . . .What Einstein did in his early years, from high school on, was read a lot of 19th Century information and theories about the overall universe and atomic theory and this was where he got many of the ideas that are attributed to him today. There are NO investigative reporters in science today, so there is no one out there trying to find the origin of some of his goofy ideas. I’m retired and I do it as a hobby.
[/quote]

There is another novel, from 1872, <i></i>Lumen<i></i> by Camille Flammarion, a French astronomer, which discusses travel at and beyond the speed of light, the relativity of simultaneity, time, and space, and the use of light speed as a measure of relative space and time.

That paragraph is a paraphrase from the book <i></i>Albert Einstein the Incorrigible Plagiarist<i></i> by Bjerknes. Anyone here familiar with the book know of any mistakes in it?

Science knows much, but ignores practically everything.

bdw000 wrote: "That paragraph is a paraphrase from the book Albert Einstein the Incorrigible Plagiarist by Bjerknes. Anyone here familiar with the book know of any mistakes in it?"

I'm familiar with it (and may I say that I continue to be impressed by your selection of sources in your ernest and unbiased search for truth and knowledge). Mr Bjerknes has produced his Magnum Opus now, and it is accessible at his web site, called jewishracism dot com. Here's a sampling of the chapter titles, just to give you the flavor of his work:

THE MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF SAINT EINSTEIN By Christopher Jon Bjerknes, a 2,825 page treatise on Einstein's plagiarism, Einstein's Zionism, history of Zionism, racism, Judaism, and more.

4.4.1 Einstein Desires a "Race" War Which Will Exterminate the European Esau
4.4.4 The Gentiles Must be Exterminated Lest God Cut Off the Jews
4.4.5 Jewish Dualism and Human Sacrifice — Evil is Good
4.4.6 Gentiles are Destined to Slave for the Jews, Then the Slaves Will be Exterminated
4.5 Einstein the Genocidal Racist
4.7.1.2 Cowardly Einstein Caught in a Lie
5.3.1 Human Sacrifice and the Plan to Discredit Gentile Government—Fulfilled
5.5.6 President Woodrow Wilson Becomes a Zionist Dictator
5.6.2 The Zionists Set the Stage for the Second World War. . . and the Third
5.10 The Holocaust as a Zionist Eugenics Program for the Jewish "Remnant": Zionist Nazis Use Natural and Artificial Selection to Strengthen the Genetic Stock of Jews Destined for Forced Deportation to Palestine
6.5.2 Hypocritical and Cowardly Einstein Plays the "Race Card" and Cripples Scientific Progress
6.5.3 What is Good for Goose is not Good for the Goyim
7.5.3 Zionists and Communists Delight in Massive Human Sacrifices to the Jewish Messianic Cause
7.5.4.2 Einstein a Subtle Hitler Apologist
7.5.6 The Final Solution of the Jewish Question is Zionism, but the Final Solution of the German Question is Extermination
8.7.3.3 Zionists Develop a Strategy Which Culminates in the Nazis and the Holocaust as Means to Attain the "Jewish State"

nonneta:

Thanks for the (very unfortunate) info about Bjerknes. What a sad world we live in.

That does not change the fact that an earlier novel has some of the same topics that showed up in Einstein's writings.

I'm not even claiming that proves anything, or that it is relevant. Just that it might be relevant. I posted that because whoever made the previous post seemed like they might be interested.

Since you are familiar with Bjerknes book, can you point to anything he says that is flat-out wrong? I really do want to know if what this guy, or anyone else, says, is definitely wrong. I would love a "qualified opinion."

Also, please do not confuse me with a serious physicist who is searching for the truth. Sensational headlines are what tend to grab the attention of the general public, of which I am a member. I have seen a sensational headline, and find it interesting. I am looking into it because it is sensational. That does not mean I know, or claim that I know, that it is correct. Or, that I am searching for the truth, the way professional scientists do.

I am not here to push an agenda, since I am not qualified to do so, but to to get people like you to show me how specific ideas are correct or not.