Thread: The COLLAPSE of SR (Special relativity)

The collapse of Special Relativity [1]

I study upon light kinematics and I have some new results/methods for space-time. One of them menaces the SR seriously.

I have followed forums about special relativity. I am glad for finding some objectors. My determination will approve their arguments.

In the forums which I joined, I tested the ability of understanding of my statement. The new concept was declared in few forums and by my book (at April 2008).

The new concept/master key will declare at August 25, 2008 (at the end of Beijing Olympics) on this thread.

The collapse of SR [2]


I want to give some secondary or preparatory information.

1- The theory of SR has consistency and it is defensible due to its postulates.
2- Every determination is produced and correct by its own references. Also, all references (and their sub/chaining references) have accordance with science or paradigm. But the roots of them are axioms or postulates. And postulates usually were not constituted by scientific procedure; they are recorded by satiated perceptions in local conditions.
3- Master-key is a postulate what has been rebuilt by scientific methods. It is very simple. And you may see complete picture of light kinematics.
4- After my information; you may think that `this is similar of Galileo event". In my opinion: It is second Galileo event.
5- The theory of SR will take part in science history as an idol for weakness of human's performance and mysticism.
6- In schools SR will use as an example for human's linear thinking instead of the nature's secret.
7- All publications about SR will be trash. And new publications will grow.
8- The space-time can be analyzed without deformation of units of dimensions due to rules of new concept.
9- I am very sorry by being the reason of a sensation.


Please activate your attention and follow.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

The collapse of Special Relativity [1]

I study upon light kinematics and I have some new results/methods for space-time. One of them menaces the SR seriously.

I have followed forums about special relativity. I am glad for finding some objectors. My determination will approve their arguments.

In the forums which I joined, I tested the ability of understanding of my statement. The new concept was declared in few forums and by my book (at April 2008).

The new concept/master key will declare at August 25, 2008 (at the end of Beijing Olympics) on this thread.

Can we keep using SR until the end of the Olympics? Or, is it already too late? Could you hold off on the collapse for just a while longer? SR works so well, it would be a shame to see it collapse so soon.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

9- I am very sorry by being the reason of a sensation.

I'm very sorry you're insane.

Originally Posted by (Q)

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

9- I am very sorry by being the reason of a sensation.

I'm very sorry you're insane.

At the past they had said "He is insane" for Copernicus, Galilei, Even Einstein.

My thesis is so simple and everybody can understand. But It will break the memorization. And your reaction is natural

You may follow me at "google" with nickname "xersanozgen"

All the best regards

I want to remember some basis rules of scientific integrity.

If we organize a relativity problem between two vehicles which one of them is on Mars and other is on Venus; we must not use the value of their velocities at Vehicle's own speed indicator. Once we must procure similar characteristic for the values of speeds. The values of both vehicles' speed must be calculated according to same or single reference for example the sun.

I hope there any problem is not.

What is the "Universal relative velocity (VUR)"?

It is sufficiency/necessary to use the value of speed indicator on the earth (by local conditions). This value of the speed is relative according to first reference or coordinate system. This value of speed presents the performance of the vehicle (we may think the maximum of performance).

If we want, we can find the velocity of the same vehicle according to the sun by vector methods. This value of speed is "relative" according to second or consecutive reference system. The third reference system is our galaxy. The fourth is local cluster of galaxies…. And then chaining ….. the external system is out of general form of Universe. Universal relative velocity of the vehicle is relative according to consecutive system of Universe. We can find this relative value by traditional methods, with vector analysis.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

You may follow me at "google" with nickname "xersanozgen"

Yes, your nonsense pervades many science forums, much with the same results.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=xersan...ient=firefox-a

We are on the earth. Human suppose the earth and himself as an absolute reference system without consciousness. Indeed, it is naturally for everybody and nobody is offended. Locality is dominant.

But we must see complete of the picture for the events about universe. For example the orbit of moon is circle, if the earth is reference system. If the sun is chosen as a reference, the orbit of the moon is like helical spring. Then if Milky Way is chosen, the orbit becomes as the form of helical spring with spiral axle…. And according to external system it becomes similar a rope or the twisted form of DNA. If we can look, we see this form the orbit of the moon. The form of circle is wrong or not perfect.

The proceeding of SR is similar the circle orbit of the moon. It claims universality, but it does not isolate the locality.

An important nuance for experiments and analysis of light kinematics:

The essential uniqueness of the light actor as a partner of SR.

The actors of mechanical experiments are evident, almost they have a name. For example we start and complete the experiment with this subject. It is very important. Because the experiment does not finished by the blue vehicle while we had begun it with red vehicle.

If we start the experiment with the ball numbered -for example- 3528 we must complete the experiment with the same numbered ball (3528). This is an undefined principle; but it is absolute requirement.

But such of light experiments are organized with the light in continuity because of some technical difficulties. In this case we can never be sure the completing the experiment by the chosen light actor, if we suppose that the light is like numbered balls or consecutive (recursive/flowing) impulses.

The light actor of SR experiments or analysis must be supposed as a flash impulse. The light actor must be isolated as a single/individual subject from case of continuity. We can succeed this for theoretical analysis.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

Originally Posted by (Q)

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

9- I am very sorry by being the reason of a sensation.

I'm very sorry you're insane.

At the past they had said "He is insane" for Copernicus, Galilei, Even Einstein.

As Carl Sagan wrote:

"They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Galileo. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown"

In other words, being called insane does not mean you're right. Get your work into a peer reviewed journal, then maybe people will take you seriously.

Originally Posted by TheBiologista

In other words, being called insane does not mean you're right. Get your work into a peer reviewed journal, then maybe people will take you seriously.

Thanks. And I agree your advise. but I do not need a career as an academician. I have a book named "Autopsy Report of SR".

You are right; Such of readers need a refere or scientific article to accept new concept. I will declare the new concept (or reconstructed postula) at science forums. Because in my opinion the members of these forums can performs their own technical minds

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

I will declare the new concept (or reconstructed postula) at science forums. Because in my opinion the members of these forums can performs their own technical minds

And you will be promptly declared insane. Good luck with that.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

At the past they had said "He is insane" for Copernicus, Galilei, Even Einstein.

Not really - Einstein's ideas on relativity were pretty widely accepted as soon as he published them. The idea that people thought he was crazy or mocked him is popular among crackpots, but it just isn't true. Of course, that's probably because if crackpots acknowledged that people accepted Einstein they will have to start wondering why people were willing to accept Einstein but aren't willing to accept them.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

Originally Posted by TheBiologista

In other words, being called insane does not mean you're right. Get your work into a peer reviewed journal, then maybe people will take you seriously.

Thanks. And I agree your advise. but I do not need a career as an academician. I have a book named "Autopsy Report of SR".

Got a link to where I can buy that book? Got a list of reviewers? Most scientists publishing books are also involved in publishing peer-reviewed primary material. Don't dismiss the credibility that world lends.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

You are right; Such of readers need a refere or scientific article to accept new concept. I will declare the new concept (or reconstructed postula) at science forums. Because in my opinion the members of these forums can performs their own technical minds

The reason we need peer review is not due to our ability or inability to understand. It is so that we do not have to read every half-conceived idea brewed up by anyone with a PhD.

Originally Posted by TheBiologista

The reason we need peer review is not due to our ability or inability to understand. It is so that we do not have to read every half-conceived idea brewed up by anyone with a PhD.

Yes we have so many demands on our time we need all the help we can get to keep from wasting it. The question is why does the nutcases like this seem to be multiplying or is it simply that the internet makes things so easy that they start coming out of the woodwork. Perhaps the average sanity of the human race is far lower than anyone has imagined.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

Originally Posted by TheBiologista

The reason we need peer review is not due to our ability or inability to understand. It is so that we do not have to read every half-conceived idea brewed up by anyone with a PhD.

Yes we have so many demands on our time we need all the help we can get to keep from wasting it. The question is why does the nutcases like this seem to be multiplying or is it simply that the internet makes things so easy that they start coming out of the woodwork. Perhaps the average sanity of the human race is far lower than anyone has imagined.

There have always been radicals shouting on street corners as long as there have been street corners. The internet is just a bigger soapbox

MASTER-KEY (1) INFORMATION for the COLLAPSE of SPECIAL RELATIVITY

The list the series of consecutive reference systems in accordance with their comprehending capacity:

A material or any one (The source of light or Einstein's train for SR)
The Earth (or Einstein's rails)
The Sun
Milky Way
Local cluster
Super cluster
The general form of Universe

Light coordinate system (Macro reference system)

NEW CONCEPT: The velocity of light is relative according to "light coordinate system/macro reference system/most external system". The velocity of light is character as Vor (Vor: The relative velocity according to out of universe).


The light does not accept anything by reference system except itself (The first coordinate system is reference for materials. The first coordinate system of light is the most external system. The values of light's speed "Vor and original*" are equal (But these values for materials are different).

The measures of light's velocity by present techniques give always the value "c" by this (Vor) labeling.

The theory of SR supposes and loads the meaning that the value "c" is relative according to its source (or train). It is very important: "Which speed do we intend to measure?"

Anyway, the new concept is actually. Henceforth, we would understand and use the meaning that the value "c" is relative according to macro reference system.

If a theoretical analysis is organized by "the light coordinate system", the units of time and length remain like classical physics (the values of velocity of all partners would be use by the character as Vor, especially for the source and observer).

For quotation: Ersan O. Autopsy Report of SR Infoyay 2003, 2008.

I am here for the questions.

*Original speed: the speed which it can create by its own power.

Originally Posted by TheBiologista

There have always been radicals shouting on street corners as long as there have been street corners. The internet is just a bigger soapbox

I was going to suggest that the collapse we should be talking about here is the collapse of the human intellect. But are you suggesting that the real collapse is that of the delusion that some of might have that human beings really have any intellect in general.

What is expressed in the communication media must represent humanity's collective voice and intellect so in that sense we are dealing with a collapse of the human intellect, regardless of what the average human may be.

As always I am a big softie at heart. I am not going to delete the thread. I am not going to consign it to the trash can, but it should be obvious it has to go to pseudoscience.

Originally Posted by xersanozgen

I am here for the questions.

What are you talking about?

Thankyou Ophiolite! :wink:

Thanks for transfering my announce to this part of forum. Reconstructing of some local postulates activate resistance naturally like Galileo's. Of course you may say that I can measure the light's velocity. It is as an absolute evidence. It is difficult to pass over the prejudies. But discussion must be not difficult. Allow you your self to think: What do we intend to measure for light's speed? And what can we measure exactly?

I am waiting serious questions.

Master-Key of Collapse of SR (4)

1- It is possible and effective the isolation some secondary factors for scientific analysis. So, it is obtained the elementary analysis on master axle of the event or subject. For example, the traveling line is straight and the speed of subject is fixed in SR; also the observer, the source and the light travels on parallel lines. They present easiness for basic analysis.
2- But, we have no the rules of these isolations or reductions. The scientists may use and decide the appropriate dosage. The optimum dosage is defined by the concept of necessity and adequacy. If the isolation is exceeded, the claims can be defended easily. But if needless isolations are removed their precision may be impaired.
3- In my opinion the possibility of scientific isolation is used over optimum or extremely in SR analysis. For example the theory is set by an inertial system and the light in the original text. And so it has consistence easily. It may be not perceived as a problem the light at the opposite direction according to the direction of its source on relative subject.
4- Lorentz's analysis has clarity for the light at the opposite according to its sources'. But also he analyzed the light at the same direction of its source. Here it is a needless isolation. If we analyze the opposite light by the rules of SR, this time we find "the time contraction" instead of dilation.
5- The theory of SR organized between only two actors with train-rails example or Earth-spaceship. But universe is never composed of only two subjects. The third and other actors menace the results of SR like in a marriage.

For example: If the relative speed of the train is Ve according to the earth; Vv according to Virgo; Vf according to the cluster Fornax; Vc according to the super cluster Coma; Va according to Abell 2246; V326 according to 3C 326.1 etc…The contraction of the train's length will be the values of e %, v %, f %, c %, a %, …..x % etc. simultaneously because of SR. And the time dilations for the train will be the values of e' %, v' %, f' %, c' %, a' %,……x' % etc. simultaneously by SR. But it is impossible the different values of deformations simultaneously.

Just a little oddity here. I used my GPS and my old computer monitor today and they are both still working. How come when the SR broke down just after the olympics?

Originally Posted by Zitterbewegung

Just a little oddity here. I used my GPS and my old computer monitor today and they are both still working. How come when the SR broke down just after the olympics?

The postulate of SR says the measured velocity of light is the relative value according to every frame (especially local frame or its source).

New concept says: The measured velocity of light is relative value according to most external frame. The well-known measuring systems (with mirrors and uninterrupted light) never measure the relative value (c +/- v) according to local frame.

If you use the new concept when you want to analyze the space-time you must adapt the speeds of other partners (source or observer) according to most external frame, you must not use local values of speeds.

That is all. If you preffer the SR, no one will be upset :wink: .

There are some definitions in science history; they were imperfect. The reason of deficiency may be because of could not perceiving the complete of picture especially for universal subjects. An example and its identical for SR:

[img]

[/img]

There are some definitions in science history; they were imperfect. The reason of deficiency may be because of could not perceiving the complete of picture especially for universal subjects. An example and its identical for SR:





The form of Earth is flat, because we have visual evidence: The sun and the moon are always upside in everywhere.

The measured value of light's velocity is relative according to local frame; because we have experimental evidence, we measure and find always the value "c" in everywhere.

The form of Earth is spherical.It was hidden because of local looking. But we can perceive this reality due to advanced science.

The measured value of light's velocity is relative only according to most external frame. We distinguish this reality/alternative due to thinking like abstract mathematics. We can measure and find the value "c" because of the technique of the measuring mechanism (with mirrors and uninterrupted light)

So, has SR collapsed yet, or is it still collapsing?

Originally Posted by (Q)

So, has SR collapsed yet, or is it still collapsing?

Yes, I guessed it is enough to give the master-key only. Now, I think, perhaps it will be significant for academicians.

But I can submit some mathematical evidences instead of abstract claim (or revised postulate). For example "TIME CONTRACTION and DILATION on the same frame"

please wait...

So, no collapse, then?

SLOWER and FASTER TEMPO of TIME at the SAME CLOCK


Figure-1: To = T'o = 0




.........................................A………….... .....…………S……..........………B
Figure-2 Tı = 10 earth-second

1- We want to analyze spaceship's motion by the theory of SR or Lorentz's analysis. The value of its speed is "v" according to The Earth.
2- The Earth is a reference frame.
3- The spaceship has a source of light (a flash). And an observer is on the Earth.
4- At the moment of To The observer and the flash are at the point "A". And it flashes.
5- Light impulse of the flash has the same value of speed "c" according to the spaceship and the Earth (according to the theory).
6- Flash's light can travel to every direction. We consider the same directional light for first analysis (Fig.-2).
7- At the moment Tı (= 10 earth-second) the light is at the point "B" and the spaceship is at the point "S".
8- The results according to the theory: (t=10 - 0=10 earth-second)

AS = v.t = 1 800 000 earth-km

L = AB =c.t= 3 000 000 earth-km (traveling length for light according to earth and the unit of earth)

SB = 1 200 000 earth-km

L'(same) = SB = 1 200 000 / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 1 500 000 ship-km (traveling length for the same light according to spaceship and the unit of ship).

t'(same) = (t - v.L/c^2) / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 5 ship-second (traveling time of the same light according to spaceship).

c = L'(same) / t'(same) = 1 500 000 / 5 = 300 000 space-km/space-second.

OK. THE THEORY IS CERTIFICATED.


to be contuined...

SLOWER and FASTER TEMPO of TIME at the SAME CLOCK [2]



.................B'………………………………….................A …………………..........S………........……B


AS = v.t = 1 800 000 earth-km

L = AB' = c.t = (-) 3 000 000 earth-km

SB' = 4 800 000 earth-km

L'(opp.) = 4 800 000 / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 6 000 000 ship-km (traveling length for the same light according to spaceship and the unit of ship).

t" (opp.) = (t - v.L/c^2) / [1 - (v/c)^2]^1/2 = 20 ship-second.

c = L'(opp.) / t"(opp.) = 6 000 000 / 20 = 300 000 ship-km/ship-second

OK. THE THEORY IS CERTIFICATED.

12- Yes, we obtained the fixed value for the velocity of light in both case.
13- T(same) =T'(same) = T(opp.) = T'(opp.) The moment of analyzing time is a singular time because of the existence of the light.
14- We have a problem. Because:

t'(opp.) >t(reference) > t'(same)
20>10>5

It means: Faster tempo > Ref. Tempo > Slower tempo

15- The same directional analysis requires slower tempo of time to remain the fixity of light's velocity.
16- But the opposite directional analysis requires faster tempo of time to remain the fixity of light's velocity.
17- It is not possible two different tempos for one clock in the same frame simultaneously because of causality.
18- One unit of ship-second is concerning with the relative speed of spaceship only. The ship-km is not problem; it has independence from light's direction. But the tempo of time is related with light's direction.

THE THEORY of SR has A CONTRARY.


Conclusions:


1- We don't need the opposite directional light to perceive this contrary; because Einstein had said in his book: The perpendicular light is not a reason for deformation of time (because its relative value of speed's projection is zero according to ship's direction. Slower tempo and reference tempo of time is together in the same frame; also this case is imposibble.
2- Doubtless the theory has sympathy because of time-travel. And there are the fanatics for the theory. They may want to kick the ball to touch. But this examination has clarity. If some one can not leave the theory because of its fantastic results like time travel, he consider misinforming.
3- Of course the light can travel the directions of 360 degree even spherical for
to be contuined...

Originally Posted by (Q)

So, no collapse, then?

Thanks for your concerning and following.

The composition of the thread is for loading interest; never mind the "collapse". My primer subject is light kinematics. The theory of SR is secondary or a result of this subject.

Allow yourself to distinguish nuance for natural reality by refined paradigm or without partiality.

We must pass over the effects of superficial opinions to find authentic reality.

I have tolarence and even sympathy for antithesis. Because also I was filled with admiration for the theory SR, when I was a mystic like Einstein. And I am filled with admiration for E = m.c^2 and the Bose-Einstein Density yet, especially in philisophy.

I want to share my ideas only; I never work to emphase them. Doubtless, the members have scientific paradigm. All the best regards.

Time moves at different rates at different speeds. Where exactly is your clock situated? On Earth or the spaceship?