The True Nature of Einstein's Relativity By Roger J.Anderton

1. History 2. Special Relativity 3. General Relativity 4. Einstein's mistakes

Before Einstein there were people working on Relativity such as this guy -

POINCARE

And after Einstein there were people working on it like this guy-

KIP THORNE

And we had this guy who messed things up a bit-

EINSTEIN

Einstein messed up Relativity after others were working on it Einstein messed up Relativity after others were working on it. And after that mess others carried on adding to the mess. So presenting now – Relativity without that mess. First Special Relativity--

The basic equation of SR (special relativity) is c'^2 t'^2 = (c^2 - v^2)t^2 (1)

Special relativity decides to set c = c' and this leads to time dilation equation: c ^2 t'^2 = (c^2 - v ^2 )t ^2 Rearrange gives t = t' / [sqrt (1 - v^2 /c ^2 )]

Newtonian physics would have t =t' so then lightspeed is variable with c' not equal to c. Equation (1) becoming: c' ^2 = (c ^2 - v ^2 )

A matter of Conventionalism whether we set the clocks – Einstein's way or Newton's way.

Its peculiar why that set-up but Einstein chose it. Light bouncing between two ends of as box, first covering distance (c - v) t as observed by someone looking at the box travelling at velocity v, then the light hits the side of the box and bounces back covering distance (c+v)t this then gets multiplied together to give (c-v)(c+v)t^2 equated to c'^2 t'^2 . Its peculiar why that set-up but Einstein chose it.

Instead of recognising the Conventionalism, they can fall into the trap that the constancy of lightspeed (in vacuum) has been discovered by experiment independent of theory. But this is not really the case. The fact is no direct experiment has shown the constancy of lightspeed (in vacuum). Instead the experiments have all be indirect when claiming the constancy of light speed (in vacuum); this is that the theory SR requires certain adjustments to be made to the experiments making such measurements, I.e SR has the experiments adjusted to conform to lightspeed constancy. Essen has pointed many of the mistakes in Einstein's formulation of SR.

ESSEN

RELATIVITY - joke or swindle ? Louis Essen re-states his view that Einstein's theory of relativity contains basic and fatal flaws. L. ESSEN

But we can also get it from other sources as being hidden in what is being talked about . For instance :

i.e. not as evidence for the light-speed postulate Einstein fan Professor Norton- John D. Norton a respected historian dealing with the history of Einstein's physics, says: “The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible with an emission theory of light that contradicts the light postulate." He also points out: “Einstein regarded the Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of relativity” i.e. not as evidence for the light-speed postulate

NORTON

By the emission theory this is meant Newtonian physics By the emission theory this is meant Newtonian physics. So can interpret the Michelson-Morley by variable light speed consistent with Newtonian physics. Michelson-Morley experiment can be interpreted by maths based on (a) constant light-speed AND (b) variable light-speed

What we have then is just indirect evidence for theory (a) What we have then is just indirect evidence for theory (a). Experiments can be interpreted by theory (a) but they need not be interpreted by theory (a); i.e. the evidence is only circumstantial and in no way conclusive.

According to Daniel Y. Gezari of NASA tells us: “In particular, the speed of light (c) has never been measured directly with a moving detector to validate the invariance of c to motion of the observer, a necessary condition for the Lorentz invariance of c. The invariance of c can now only be inferred from indirect experimental evidence. It is also not widely recognized that essentially all of the experimental support for special relativity in the photon sector consists of null results.

GEZARI

So that is why can either do c' = c or t' = t in the above analysis of equation (1). Only indirectly has it been decided that c' =c by the believers in SR i.e. they start from assuming it, and have no direct evidence for their assumption thus leaving t'=t as equally valid.

So now have dismissed SR as replacment for Newtonian physics So now have dismissed SR as replacment for Newtonian physics. Messing around with clocks is basically what Einstein does. Now on to general relativity-

For Einstein becoming famous in 1919 - general relativity was said to give twice light bending as that of Newtonian gravitational theory. But really Newtonian theory gives same value of light bending from a primary and secondary gravitational effect.

The primary gravitational effect in uniform gravitational field is shown in fig.1.

The secondary gravitational effect when non- uniform gravitational field is shown in fig.2.

“In 1994, he [Thorne] published 'Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy', a landmark book for non-scientists for which he received numerous awards.Thorne As stated by Thorne space-time curvature and tidal gravity are the same thing expressed in different languages, the former in the language of relativity, the later in the language of Newtonian gravity.”

That is basically a revision of Einstein because Einstein messed up That is basically a revision of Einstein because Einstein messed up. What we have now is language of General relativity and language of Newtonian physics.

Its a bit confusing so I will go over it again- Newtonian physics calculation done only considering primary gravitational effect circa 1919. When Newtonian physics calculation done with both primary and secondary effect then gives light deflection as observed in 1919. Thorne revision to general relativity it is now Newtonian physics but using a different language.

Film clip http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajhFNcUTJI0

Conclusion So after 1919 have returned to Newtonian physics. However this is not well-publicised, so still have illusion of Einstein in mass media physics presented to public.

FIN