| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Einsteinhoax" |
| Date: |
20 Feb 2005 09:18:16 AM |
| Object: |
The Error in Relativistic Physics |
The Error in Relativistic Physics
The Science of Physics is based upon the making of measurements. What
can be measured is taken as being "true". This is an excellent philosophy,
but unfortunately the addition of the concepts of relativity into science
has allowed for an inexcusable level of intellectual sloppiness. Once
Fitzgerald had his "aha" revelation and asserted that the reason for the
results of the Michaelson-Morley Experiment was that "yardsticks" were
shortening in the direction of the relative velocity and Larmor added the
proviso that if "yardsticks" were shortening, then clocks must also be
slowing, another degree of freedom was added to the concept of measurement
which must not be ignored. (Yes, the understanding of the effects of
velocity is attributed to Dr. Einstein who showed, in his derivation of the
Special theory of Relativity (STR), that applying mathematics to known
physical laws could derive these effects. It must be remembered however,
that the Lorentz Transformation-Aether Theory (LCAT) of Fitzgerald, Larmor
and Lorentz is actually a special case solution of Special Relativity and
since the two theories are cross-derivable they are really different ways of
expressing the same theory. As a result, the existence of the Aether cannot
be disproved without also disproving STR. LCAT asserts that the Aether does
exist but, because of the form of the Lorentz Transformations, and the fact
that it was believed that information cannot propagate faster than the
velocity of light, our velocity with respect to that Aether cannot be
measured. STR asserts that the effects predicted by Fitzgerald, Larmor and
Lorentz do occur but, since our absolute velocity through space cannot, in
principle, be measured, considerations of the Aether are unnecessary for
computations but are not invalid. Many physicists assert that the Aether has
been proven "not to exist". While it is true that it does not exist in the
mathematics of Special Relativity, only a fool would assert that its
non-existence has been proven. Whether the Aether exists or not can only be
determined by searching for other evidence that requires the existence of
the Aether in physical observations. Dr. Einstein himself warned, "remember
gentlemen, we have not proven that the Aether does not exist, we have only
proven that we do not need it (for calculations)", a conclusion which is
entirely consistent with LCAT.
If one accepts the existence of the Aether (LTAT), the mysterious
nature of velocity effects vanish when one applies the appropriate Lorentz
Transformations to observations made between three velocity reference frames
http://members.isp.com/einsteinhoax@isp.com/einsteinhoax/cf64.gif. The
necessary analysis (8 pages of algebra) required to achieve an intuitive
understanding of velocity relativity phenomena is tedious, but it does yield
correct results. (Any physicist who claims expertise in Special Relativity
and who has not performed such an analysis has not done his homework and
probably should look for another line of work.) The mathematical approach
taken by STR has the advantage of being far simpler in that it allows the
observer to consider his own reference frame to have zero velocity with
respect to space. This is fine for a mathematical analysis, but it presents
difficulties when one attempts to understand the mechanisms by which Nature
operates.
The writer is aware that the idea of mechanism has been abolished from
physical theory, leaving only mathematics and experiment; the reality is
that we live in a mechanism and it is our job to eventually understand its
workings as a mechanism. Unfortunately, instead of recognizing SRT is a
convenient mathematical abstraction, however, the concept of space-time was
invented. Under the space-time concept it was asserted that only one reality
existed because what we considered as space and time were aspects of a
single composite entity called "space-time" (requiring, as Dr. Einstein has
been reported to have said, an infinite number of Aethers.)
When one considers the inputs from quantum theorists, the idea of a
single entity of space-time encompassing all velocity reference frames
becomes absurd. One of the two interpretations of quantum physics is the
"spooky" requirement that quantum effects propagate though all of space at
an in infinite velocity. On the surface this would appear to violate the
requirement of Special Relativity that nothing can propagate faster than the
velocity of light. Actually, Special Relativity does not have that
requirement, Special Relativity asserts that energy, and information encoded
in the form of energy, cannot propagate faster than light because the
Lorentz Transformation for Energy (Force times Length) becomes infinite at
that velocity. SRT does not make any assertion about information that is
encoded in a form that does not involve energy. One should note that
changing the direction of polarization of a photon DOES NOT change its
energy. As a result, the quantum coupling of the polarization of "paired
photons" does not involve the transfer of energy between them and the
velocity limitations of SRT do not apply to the transfer of information by
polarization coupling. There is, at present at least, no theoretical reason
why the "spooky" characteristic of quantum physics is not reasonable and is
not consistent with Special Relativity.
At present, experiments in quantum physics have shown that information
encoded in such a manner can propagate at a velocity of at least 4 times
that of light and perhaps at an infinite velocity. This capability can
readily be used to establish our absolute velocity through space to an
accuracy of better than 400 miles per second and, in so doing, establish
both that the Aether theory must represents reality. There is, however,
another interpretation of the effect provided by Quantum Physics. This
theory asserts that every decision point (e.g.- particle) in our Universe
generates a new, coexisting, Universe as complex as our own at every instant
of time. Each of these coexisting Universes contains an amount of energy
equal to the energy of our own Universe and its component particles occupies
the same volume of space as they do in our Universe. When one considers the
interactions involved (i.e.- the factorial number of particles in the
Universe and the number of instants of time which have elapsed since the
Universe has formed), the number is so vast as to defy the imagination. In
addition, it defies the precepts that energy cannot be created or destroyed
and that two entities cannot occupy the same space at the same time. The
writer asserts that the concept can be rejected as a mathematical pipedream
of the type that Dr. Leary would approve.
The intellectual sloppiness that has transpired is the failure of the
scientific community to recognize that LCAT and STR have shown that, in
making a measurement in and or between two different reference frames,
(elevation or velocity) one must also include the effect, if any, of the
change in the reference frame (velocity or elevation) on the "size" of the
units of measurement employed. The measurements must, of necessity, be made
"locally" and then, using the appropriate relativistic transformations; the
results of observation must be corrected to determine what is actually
occurring between the reference frames. Without making such an accounting,
it is not possible to be sure what actually did occur as a result of the
change in reference frame. NATURE DOES NOT CARE WHAT WE MEASURE, IT CARES
ABOUT WHAT IS ACTUALLY OCCURRING IN "ABSOLUTE TERMS". Our failure to
recognize this is what leads to the mysterious nature of Relativity.
An example is in order. Suppose one was to observe that the price of
gasoline was $1.25/gallon at one end of a bridge and was also $1.25/gallon
at the other end of the bridge. It would seem to be a safe assertion that
the price of gasoline was unchanged when the bridge was crossed. In the
language of the physicist, the price of gasoline would be termed as
"constant" between the two locations. This does not necessarily mean that
the price of gasoline did not change. If we add a new item of information,
that the bridge crossed the Detroit River from Windsor, Ontario to Detroit,
Michigan, the conclusion changes. In Canada, gasoline is measured in terms
of the Imperial Gallon, while in the US the US gallon is used. In addition,
in Canada the Canadian Dollar is used as a medium of exchange, while in the
US the US Dollar is used. At both locations we measure value in terms of
local Dollars and fluid content in terms of local gallons. However, neither
the dollars nor the gallon are the same at the two locations. In order to
determine the relative price of gasoline at the two locations, one must
determine the relationship between the units of measurement for money
(exchange rate) and units of measurement for fluid volume between the
locations. Until such a determination is made, one can draw no legitimate
conclusion as to the effect of crossing the bridge on the price of gasoline.
In the case described, the price of gasoline is a "constant" in the
same sense that a physicist would describe the velocity of light as a
"constant". More precisely, the price of gasoline should be termed as
"invariant" (it measures as having the same value) between the locations.
Whether it would be also be "constant" (unchanged) would depend upon the
exchange rate between the currencies. The "invariant" price of gasoline
would be "constant" only of the Canadian Dollar was worth $1.25 US. Dollars.
This is what Relativity is all about!
What Fitzgerald recognized was that for the effects shown by the
Michaelson-Morley Experiment to occur, the unit of measurement for length
would have to differ in the direction of relative velocity and Larmor
recognized that this required a reciprocal change in the units of
measurement of time. In a (Force-Length-Time) system of units, this required
that the effect of velocity on the units of measurement be: Force = 1 Length
= 1/(1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 Time = (1-V^2/C^2)^0.5 (The effects of a change in
velocity on all other units of measurement can be derived using the rules of
"Dimensional Analysis" as derived in the 19th Century to facilitate the
study of Fluid Dynamics. This discipline allows any three entities to be
used as the basis of a system of units. Force has been substituted for mass
since force is directly observable while mass is not and the removal of mass
as a basic unit makes the related material simpler.)
By incorporating these transformations with the assumption that
information cannot be transmitted faster than the velocity of light
(actually, Quantum Physics has shown that it can be as long as the
information is not encoded in the form of energy) it is found that any
attempt to measure our absolute velocity through space is doomed to failure
because it is not possible to establish whether two physically separated
clocks are synchronized to an accuracy better than the time of travel of
light between those locations. When the effects of these transformations are
factored into the results of observation and the mathematics involved, the
relativistic effects of velocity are found to be classically Newtonian. The
mysterious nature of STR vanishes.
STR works because the triads of Lorentz transformations contain minus
signs and are multiplicatively commutative. The minus signs insure that the
transformations for length and time become infinite or zero respectively
when the relative velocity becomes equal to the velocity of light. The
property of multiplicative commutivity insures that, when the effect between
reference frames #1 and #2 is multiplied by the effect between reference
frames #2 and #3, the results are the same as the effect directly between
reference frame #1 and #3. The basic relativistic triad must be
multiplicatively commutative, contain minus signs where appropriate, and
have the property that the dimensional content of Planck's Constant (F*L*T)
must be unity if the theory is to match the results of observations.
When we get to the gravitational field, an examination of the
gravitational transformations it provides reveals that something is amiss.
The gravitational transformations provided by General Relativity are in the
form:-
Force = 1
Length = 1
Time = 1/(1+$)
Space = 1/(1+$)
(The transformation for space is provided to account for the alleged
curvature of space in the gravitational field.). It will be noted that the
required minus sign does not exist and the transformation for Length is
unity instead of the reciprocal of the transformation for time. As a result,
General Relativity is incompatible with both the Principles of Equivalence
and of Relativity! This is odd since these principles were used as the basis
of General Relativity's derivation. BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD!
The use of a few simple "thought experiments" of the type pioneered by
Dr. Einstein, allows the correct gravitational transformations to be
derived. This can be accomplished by two independent methods that yield
identical results. The corrected gravitational tranformations become:
Force = 1
Length = 1/(1-$)
Time = (1-$)
As will be noted, the required minus sign is present, the
transformations for length and time are reciprocal and space is no longer
required to be curved.
When the corrected transformations are applied to the gravitational
field, the source of gravitational energy is immediately revealed and it is
possible to predict a path of contraction of a massive object as it attempts
to collapse into a hypothetical "black hole". As observed externally, the
object collapses asymptotically to its "horizon radius". As observed
internally (if that were possible), the object appears to collapse to four
times its "horizon radius" and then to expand to an infinite radius. Late in
the process, the object would appear to be a Universe similar to our own
which had its origin in an inflationary "big bang" and is now expanding at
an ever-increasing rate. The text that predicts this result, "Gravity", was
copyrighted in 1987. It may be found at Website
http://www/members.aol.com/einsteinhoax/gravity.htm .
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999) located at
http://members.isp.com/einsteinhoax@isp.com/einsteinhoax/site.htm.
EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE
WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND
IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All Newsposts by this Website are available at
http://members.isp.com/einsteinhoax@isp.com/postinglog/newspostings.com
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:-
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: The Error in Relativistic Physics |
20 Feb 2005 07:10:49 PM |
|
|
Einsteinhoax wrote:
The Error in Relativistic Physics
[snip 250 lines of ignorant crap]
http://www.freefarts.com/farts.html
Move cursor over blinkers to hear Retic's lecture.
Psychotic ineducable boring spammer retic (Ernest Wittke),
You see yourself this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete6.jpg
The entire remainder of the planet sees you this way,
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/effete3.png
http://www.edu-observatory.org/cranks.html
http://www.pagetutor.com/idiot/idiot.html
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/sunshine.jpg
<http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/youare.swf>
http://www.meninhats.com/d/20040430.html
http://www.you-moron.com/
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=group%3Asci.physics+author%3Awittke
http://b5.sdvc.uwyo.edu/bab5/snds/argcstpd.wav
http://www.apa.org/journals/psp/psp7761121.html
http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/quack.html
<http://www.firehead.org/~jessh/film/kubrick/Kubrick-Psycho.html>
<http://www.naturalchild.com/elliott_barker/prisons.html>
The source material for this posting may be found in "Gravity" (1987),
"The Einstein Hoax" (1997), and "Corrections to Residual Errors in Special
Relativity (1999)
[snip]
Hey, stooopid spammer Ernest Wittke - Do you want EVIDENCE? Each of
the 24 GPS satellites carries either four cesium atomic clocks or
three rubidum atomic clocks in orbit, with full relativistic
corrections being applied. NAVSTAR Block II GPS satellites (currently
being launched as replacements) have two rubidium and two cesium
atomic clocks.
Internal inconsistencies in SR (meaning inconsistencies of a purely
mathematical logical nature) automatically lead to contradictions in
number theory, itself, and arithmetic, since the mathematics of
Minkowski geometry is equiconsistent with the theory of real numbers
and with arithmetic.
<http://optoelectronics.perkinelmer.com/content/Datasheets/rfs2f.pdf>
<http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html>
Mathematics of gravitation
<http://wugrav.wustl.edu/people/CMW/update98.pdf>
<http://www.astro.northwestern.edu/AspenW04/Papers/lorimer1.pdf>
Equivalence Principle testing
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0111236
Geometric structure of reality
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0103044
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140
GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
<http://www.weburbia.demon.co.uk/physics/experiments.html>
Experimental constraints on General Relativity
<http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf>
Nature 425 374 (2003)
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
<http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf>
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-1/index.html>
Relativity in the GPS system
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014
Amer. J. Phys. 71 770 (2003)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 121101 (2004)
falling light
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html>
Hafele-Keating Experiment
http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html
<http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html>
Twin Paradox
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html>
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0405160
Black hole evaporation
Physics Today 57(7) 40 (2004)
http://physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-7/p40.shtml
No aether
http://fsweb.berry.edu/academic/mans/clane/
http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/3/7
No Lorentz violation
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0409089
Spin-2 gravitons have problems
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/sci.physics.strings/msg/ba31a00f5f26277a>
(so does the proposal)
<http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Nordtvedt Effect
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0403292
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310723
WMAP + Sloane Digital Sky Survey
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175
Dark matter candidates
<http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March01/Carroll/frames.html>
Carroll on what it all means.
Special Relativity is physics on a topologically trivial Lorentzian
manifold with a metric whose curvature tensor is zero. This is a
perfectly diffeomorphism-invariant condition and does not require
any particular coordinate choice. It is invariant under
the full group of diffeomorphisms. The Poincare group is
the group of *isometries* of the metric in special relativity.
The Special Relativity metric is *non-dynamical* (unlike GR). It
defines the coupling *constants* of your theory. If you change the
metric in any nontrivial way you are changing your theory. An
operation can only be called a "symmetry" of a special-relativistic
(non-gravitational) theory if it preserves the metric, and therefore
the symmetry of special-relativistic theories is the Poincare group
only. General Relativity (gravitation) has a dynamic metric.
NIM A 355 537 (1995)
Physics Letters B 328 103 (1994)
Physical Review Letters 64 1697 (1990)
Physical Review Letters 39 1051 (1977)
Physical Review 135 B1071 (1964)
Physics Letters 12 260 (1964)
Europhysics Letters 56(2) 170-174 (2001)
General Relativity and Gravitation 34(9) 1371 (2002)
http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
<http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/sr/ae_1905_error.htm>
<http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/finkelstein/relativity.pdf>
Longitudinal and transverse mass
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0306076.pdf
<http://www.metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter-3.ASP>
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/gpsuser/gpsuser.pdf
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/sigspec/default.htm
http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pubs/gps/icd200/default.htm
http://www.trimble.com/gps/index.html
http://sirius.chinalake.navy.mil/satpred/
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html
http://egtphysics.net/GPS/RelGPS.htm
http://www.schriever.af.mil/gps/Current/current.oa1
http://edu-observatory.org/gps/gps_books.html
<http://www-astronomy.mps.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html>
If anyone
provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be objectively answered, the
material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Right, like your head has ever been withdrawn from your ***** - even
when you *****.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: The Error in Relativistic Physics |
20 Feb 2005 09:27:56 AM |
|
|
Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax " at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+hoax+site%3Awww.crank.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: The Error in Relativistic Physics |
20 Feb 2005 10:35:53 AM |
|
|
Thanks for registering "The Einstein Hoax " at crank dot net.
http://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+hoax+site%3Awww.crank.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
