Notices
Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By KALSTER

Thread: Einstein's Theory of Relativity is Flawed

  1. #1 Einstein's Theory of Relativity is Flawed 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    62
    This is a new discovery that is based on one of the three fundamental assumptions upon which Einstein based his theory:

    http://www.science-site.net/index.htm

    On the right side of this page you will see a News Release and some site links that have more detailed information.

    I would like to hear from viewers about this new development.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I am wholly unequipped to comment upon the maths or the physics of this claim. I do however consider myself reasonably well versed in human nature. On this basis I dismiss the claim, since I would never trust anyone who chooses to offer me light blue print on a dark blue background.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Ophiolite's answer 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    62
    Is the best I have read here so far.

    It is not necessary for you to understand all of the physics of Relativity Theory. The basic assumption upon which it is based rests in electromagnetic theory. The measurements of electromagnetic radiation indicate that radiation propagates spherically. However, no one seems to have plotted the dynamic waves from the radiation equation that dates back to 1936 (see Mesny). That is simply what I have done, and as a result I presented a technical paper on the subject:

    http://www.science-site.net/RadiationArticle.pdf

    In this paper, (in black and white) the plots show that the radiation waves are not spherical, and that they compress as they radiate outward. Although the radial portion of the wave progresses at the speed of light, the tangential wave velocity increases with distance.

    The resulting conclusion is that it is not time and space that compresses, but that it is the electromagnetic wave that compresses, which also indicates that the Minkowski/Einstein interpretation of space-time is flawed.

    As to my website colors, note that I am somewhat color-blind. Perhaps I will change them to your liking.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    24
    I want to add something about the color (sorry, I know it is unnecessary).

    Like Ophiolite said; since I would never trust anyone who chooses to offer me light blue print on a dark blue background

    I think he means that it kind of looks like a conspiracy theory website. I would recommend a plain white (maybe something like the clouds on a clear day in summer) with black writing. (use a font that is easy to read, not that it will be easier to remember.. no easy fonts have to opposite effect. But just for the sake of it, I mean we're not all driven people who dedicate all their time in science, I guess you want to approach a broader public e.g. students)
    The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is inefficiency. Eugene McCarthy
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinholt
    I think he means that it kind of looks like a conspiracy theory website.
    Exactly. That is precisely what I meant.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6 Thanks for the advise on my web site 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    62
    I will indeed change the text colors to black and white. Perhaps blue for the links.

    My interest in posting on this forum is to have some critiques that I can counter with real and proven data. Who do you think would possibly believe that Einstein's Theory of Relativity could possibly be wrong? Few if any, and I probably would have been one of them if I had not put so much time and energy into my investigations. Just the study of Planck's quantum theory took two years, and then another year to publish the book. It is also rather amazing that no one has before plotted the radiating waves of electromagnetic radiation before. The fact that they move in two orthogonal directions simultaneously is interesting in itself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    Yes its flawed. Observation of an object is separate from the physical reality pertaining to that observation. Just because something appears to be traveling faster or slower to the human eye, does not change the physical reality of what's actually occurring at the space time point. The observation that changes is the observation of light over time and not of the physical reality of a given event changing, due to the perspective changing. Perspective has no bearing on the physical reality.

    Davo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Quote Originally Posted by HeyIts007 View Post
    Yes its flawed. Observation of an object is separate from the physical reality pertaining to that observation. Just because something appears to be traveling faster or slower to the human eye, does not change the physical reality of what's actually occurring at the space time point. The observation that changes is the observation of light over time and not of the physical reality of a given event changing, due to the perspective changing. Perspective has no bearing on the physical reality.

    Davo
    I'm afraid you are incorrect. Have a look at the Muon experiment that confirm the reality of relativity: Muon Experiment in Relativity

    This is but one confirmation. There are many.
    adelady likes this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    Yes it's flawed. The observation has no bearing on the physical reality. Measurements themselves are not relative to velocities, but rather more precisely, it's simply the observation of measurements, which are relative to velocities. The actual measurements remain constant within the confines of the physical reality.
    Last edited by HeyIts007; December 30th, 2012 at 07:01 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by HeyIts007 View Post
    Yes it's flawed. The observation has no bearing on the physical reality. Measurements themselves are not relative to velocities, but rather more precisely, it's simply the observation of measurements, which are relative to velocities. The actual measurements remain constant within the confines of the physical reality.
    Incorrect.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D. merumario's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    nigeria
    Posts
    844
    please seen your site and your equations,but still dont know where you are driving to. are trying to say GR is incorrect? if you think it is then you have miles to walk and mountains to climb. because what you have there is crap compared to GR,no pure arguments,predictions,am not even sure if you did'nt manipulate equations and even if you did not. what is all this some kind of article to give einstein a big blow? you really should get posting on this stuff because you just cannot drop what you want and expect people like myself to say yea yea.
    "I am sorry for making this letter longer than usual.I actually lacked the time to make it shorter."###
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    17
    Yea I agree it's flawed. Nothing is prefect, so it has to be flawed.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •