X-Received: by 2002:ae9:e702:0:b0:6b5:9c37:8b23 with SMTP id m2-20020ae9e702000000b006b59c378b23mr19767250qka.511.1661341004206;
        Wed, 24 Aug 2022 04:36:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6870:f111:b0:11c:e124:cd88 with SMTP id
 k17-20020a056870f11100b0011ce124cd88mr3303589oac.39.1661341003945; Wed, 24
 Aug 2022 04:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Path: ...!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: fr.sci.astrophysique
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 04:36:43 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=93.27.150.145; posting-account=Lz-LbgoAAABPDavKeW-eYeobwLHD_cvQ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 93.27.150.145
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <659a23cb-83d6-4022-ac5c-13d12cb184c5n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: LIGO's Gravitational Waves Disproved in...1887
From: Pentcho Valev <pentcho.valev@gmail.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 11:36:44 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bytes: 3857
Lines: 47

Spacetime and gravitational waves (ripples in spacetime) don't exist - LIGO=
's "discoveries" are fakes. The reason is that the speed of light is VARIAB=
LE AS PER NEWTON, as originally (prior to introducing the length-contractio=
n fudge factor) proved by the Michelson-Morley experiment:

https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f10f1c25528a4e5edc9bae200640f31c-pjl=
q

"Emission theory, also called emitter theory or ballistic theory of light, =
was a competing theory for the special theory of relativity, explaining the=
 results of the Michelson=E2=80=93Morley experiment of 1887. [...] The name=
 most often associated with emission theory is Isaac Newton. In his corpusc=
ular theory Newton visualized light "corpuscles" being thrown off from hot =
bodies at a nominal speed of c with respect to the emitting object, and obe=
ying the usual laws of Newtonian mechanics, and we then expect light to be =
moving towards us with a speed that is offset by the speed of the distant e=
mitter (c =C2=B1 v)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_theory

So in 1887 the Michelson-Morley experiment was compatible with Newton's var=
iable speed of light, c'=3Dc=C2=B1v. The crucial question is:

Was the experiment simultaneously, in 1887, compatible with the constant sp=
eed of light, c'=3Dc, posited by the ether theory and "borrowed" by Einstei=
n in 1905?

The answer "yes" is too blatantly fraudulent, even by the standards of the =
Einstein cult, so Einsteinians don't discuss this question. Only Banesh Hof=
fmann did, but his implicit answer was "no":

"Moreover, if light consists of particles, as Einstein had suggested in his=
 paper submitted just thirteen weeks before this one, the second principle =
seems absurd: A stone thrown from a speeding train can do far more damage t=
han one thrown from a train at rest; the speed of the particle is not indep=
endent of the motion of the object emitting it. And if we take light to con=
sist of particles and assume that these particles obey Newton's laws, they =
will conform to Newtonian relativity and thus automatically account for the=
 null result of the Michelson-Morley experiment without recourse to contrac=
ting lengths, local time, or Lorentz transformations. Yet, as we have seen,=
 Einstein resisted the temptation to account for the null result in terms o=
f particles of light and simple, familiar Newtonian ideas, and introduced a=
s his second postulate something that was more or less obvious when thought=
 of in terms of waves in an ether." Banesh Hoffmann, Relativity and Its Roo=
ts, p.92 https://www.amazon.com/Relativity-Its-Roots-Banesh-Hoffmann/dp/048=
6406768

See more here: https://twitter.com/pentcho_valev

Pentcho Valev