Re: Emma
- From: "CWatters" <colin.watters@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 15:26:29 GMT
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:da0p3c$hr$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I'm sorry if I too am wrong but I'm not buying all this.
Nope me neither... Google that email address of "her's"
mrandmrsrelativity@xxxxxxxxx
Someone with the same email address has been posting about relativity on
sci.physics.relativity. See below.
Emma - If that's your dad posting below please ask him your electronic
questions.
Path:
phobos.telenet-ops.be!kwabbernoot.telenet-ops.be!nntp.telenet.be!newsreader.
com!feed7.newsreader.com!newsreader.com!green.octanews.net!news-out.octanews
..net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for
From: "mrand" <mrandmrsrelativity@xxxxxxxxx>
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.physics.relativity
Subject: In GR, why no Lorentz Transformations for length??
Date: 20 Jun 2005 16:46:19 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 88
Message-ID: <1119311179.113247.6590@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 61.9.36.174
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1119311185 11306 127.0.0.1 (20 Jun 2005 23:46:25
GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@xxxxxxxxxx
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:46:25 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@xxxxxxxxxx
Injection-Info: g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=61.9.36.174;
posting-account=zhcRsw0AAAASBieP2sxtEcmL3kzRTV7c
Xref: kwabbernoot.telenet-ops.be sci.physics:765021
sci.physics.relativity:438646
Some of you may hate Retic. But let's forget the hatred for
a while and focus on the substance of his arguments that in General
Relativity, there is no Lorentz Transformations for length and it
is a mistake of Einstein. Why is Retic wrong in his arguments as
follows:
An alarm bell should ring when one examines the conclusions of
General Relativity and of Special Relativity. One does not need a
high level of brilliance or education to recognize that the two
theories are incompatible and, as a result, cannot satisfy the
Principle of Equivalence! Somewhere in the mathematics an error had
been made. The existence of this error is made evident by the fact
that, in a force-length-time system of measurement, there exists,
under Special Relativity, the Lorentz Transformations for Length
and for Time. Under General Relativity, on the other hand, while
there is a transformation for time (the time dilation), there is
no analogous transformation for length. It is the absence of this
transformation which required the concept of "curved space" to make
the mathematics self consistent.
When one examines the mathematical treatment which produced General
Relativity to find the source of obvious error in the theory, it is
not hard to find that error. The mathematics involved the double
integration of and equation in the form:-
(dS)^2= (dX)^2+(dY)^2+(dZ)^2-(Kt*C*dT)^2
where Kt is the time transformation provided by Special Relativity.
Anyone who is familiar with integral calculus will recognize that, to
be rigorously correct, coefficients must be provided for the length
terms
(dX), (dY), and (dZ). The failure to include such coefficients
arbitrarily
sets them at unity. The effect is, to borrow a term from the legal
profession, the arbitrary assumption of a fact not yet in evidence.
Adding
such coefficients does not introduce an error, if they are not required
the
mathematical solution will set them at unity and no harm will be done.
If
they are required, the solution will either be in error or will be
impossible (as was the case with General Relativity). Unfortunately,
instead
of correcting this error, Dr. Einstein resorted to the fakery of
"curved
space"! For the derivation of General Relativity to have been rigorous,
the
equation to be integrated should have been written:
(dS)^2= (Kx*dX)^2+(Ky*dY)^2+(Kz*dZ)^2-(Kt*C*dT)^2
While separate coefficients for X, Y, and Z are required for rigor, it
is
not unreasonable to assume that space is isotropic and set Kx, Ky, and
Kz
are equal and set them equal to K. If this had been done, General
Relativity
would have yielded its result in terms of our normal three dimensional
Euclidean Space.
The existence of this error is evident in the difficulty in reconciling
General Relativity with Quantum Theory without mathematically resorting
to
fictitious extra dimensions (eleven dimensional space seems to be
currently
in vogue). When one corrects the information provided by General
Relativity,
which has been derived independently by two other independent methods,
an
entirely different picture of reality emerges. Energy is found to be
conserved in the absolute sense, the source of the force of gravity is
revealed, and our cosmological observations are provided with a clear
explanation. It shows that the "big bang" origin of our universe never
happened. As observed from the inside of a gravitationally collapsing
object, the object appears to contract until a radius of four times the
horizon radius is reached and then is observed to expand to an infinite
radius as its absolute radius contracts to the horizon radius. Gravity
is
revealed to be a force resulting from the release of mass energy due to
the
contraction of matter as a result of a reduction of elevation. The
subject
is treated in detail in http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
<http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm>.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Circuit Calculations Mismatched
- Next by Date: Re: Circuit Calculations Mismatched
- Previous by thread: Re: Emma
- Next by thread: ethernet networking problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
