Re: "Einstein's Unfortunate Legacy #1"


Negab wrote:
"Einstein's Unfortunate Legacy #1"

Dr. Einstein is credited with being a modern Newton who provided a sea
change shift in our understanding of physical reality. He is credited with
this accomplishment by virtue of his Special Theory of Relativity (1905)
which explained the apparently impossible results of the
Michealson-Morley Experiment and providing the equivalence of mass and
energy with his equation E=M*C^2. He then provided the General theory of
Relativity (1919) which is alleged to explain the nature and behavior of the
gravitational field.

If one takes the trouble to read the texts written in the early years
of the 20th century one comes to a somewhat different conclusion. The
earliest reference found to E=M*C^2 is a derivation by J.J. Thomson in 1888
when Dr. Einstein was in knee pants. (This derivation, which the writer has
not examined, relied on the validity of Maxwell's Equations). In 1903 Mr.
Fitzgerald and Dr. Larmor respectively came up with a length and time
transformations between reference frames which had a relative velocity. When
combined with the Lorentz Transformations for Mass, these transformations
provided a complete explanation of the results of the Michealson-Morley
Experiment in a manner which was completely consistent with the idea of the
classical Aether. The result was known as the Lorentz Transformation-Aether
Theory (LTAT - 1903). with those concepts as a guide, Dr. Einstein managed
to derive Special Relativity from basic principles rather than observation.
Except for their perspective, these theories are identical! STR asserts that
our absolute velocity cannot be measured and therefore may be ignored in
physical theory while LTAT asserts that the aether is basic to reality but
our velocity with respect to it cannot be measured due to the effects of the
Lorentz Transformations and the fact that information cannot be transmitted
at a velocity greater than that of light.

While STR provided a significant computational advantage over LTAT, as
a proof of Dr. Einstein's brilliance, STR leaves much to be desired. It is
axiomatic that when an intelligent individual(s) provides a solution to a
problem, any jackass(es) can make an improvement(s). (This is not intended
as a slur on Dr. Einstein. It is provided to point out that STR does not
prove his brilliance.) It is also axiomatic that the individual(s) who
provide the improvement will invariably be given the credit for the results.
That credit is almost never given to the truly intelligent individual(s)
(e.g.- Fitzgerald) who actually provided the solution.

Unfortunately the academic community asserted that since the Aether
could not be observed IT WAS PROVEN NOT TO EXIST! This assertion is invalid,
a proof of non-observability does not constitute a proof of non-existence or
constitute a proof that our reality does not depend on its existence. It
only proves that the effects of the Aether combine in such a manner as to
make its presence unobservable. STR leaves one free to assume that LTAT
represents our reality where convenient. The consequences of this faulty
conclusion required theoreticians to invent substitutes for the Aether in
the form of Dirac's Negative Energy Space (whatever that might be) and in
the idea of that forces which act at a distance were provided by the
exchange of "virtual particles". While the concept of "virtual forces"
explains these forces mathematically, it fails completely when one examines
applies the requirement that it explain the momentum transfer required to
produce attractive forces.

Dr. Einstein's finally contribution in the realm of STR was the
assertion that the velocity of light was both "constant" (having the same
"absolute" value) and "a constant" (having the same "relative" value). This
assertion has led to much confusion over the past century, as evidenced by
postings in this newsgroup. This confusion results for the fact that the
Lorentz Transformation for Velocity is the Lorentz Transformation for Length
divided by the Lorentz Transformation for Time. Since this transformation is
not unity but is rather the square of the Lorentz Transformation for Length,
it is clear that the velocity of light, which is observed to be "a constant"
cannot be also be "constant" between velocity reference frames. In an
absolute sense it changes exactly as the geometry between moving reference
frames requires. The failure of theoreticians to recognize this distinction
has led to the rejection of an absolute velocity reference frame and has led
to the absurdity evidenced by the concept of "space-time" as a
representation of reality. Space-time is actually nothing more than a
convenient mathematical construct which has been promoted as representing
reality. The motive for this promotion is clearly the attempt to convert
what is a reasonable physical reality into a mystery which only the
privileged elite can understand.

The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). 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 of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

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:- einsteinhoax@xxxxxxxx If you wish a reply, be sure that your
mail reception is not blocked.

The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
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.

-----------------------------------------------
100 Years of E=mc2


1. What is E=mc2 ? What is its importance?

E=mc2 is the most wonderful and significant equation is physics. In
1945 the explosion of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were base
upon this equation. According to this mass (m) can be converted to
energy (E) and energy can be converted to mass.
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

2. This equation is doing well since past 100 years then where is the
inconsistency?

The inconsistency lies in its mathematical derivation (a method to
obtain a mathematical equation). In his 1905 paper Einstein did not
derive it mathematically but in true sense speculated it. Einstein
earlier derived L = mc2 (light energy mass conversion equation). Then
Einstein speculated that what is true for light energy (L) the same is
true for every energy (E). This speculation results in E=mc2, such a
significant equation must be based upon a specific mathematical
derivation and not on speculation.

3. Is Einstein’s derivation of L =mc2 correct?

The derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or true in special conditions
only. Einstein took just handpicked parameters out of numerous
possible, to obtain the equation. Einstein was aware of the reality so
he left in midway after getting the desired result. If all valid
values of parameters are taken, then results are contradictory in
nature.

4. What are contradictory results?

Some UNDISCUSSED predictions of Einstein’s 29 Sep. 1905 derivation
blatantly contradict Law of Conservation of Matter. I have
scientifically confirmed the same. No limitation can be bigger than
this in science.

5. Was E=mc2 or similar ideas existed before Einstein?

Yes, E=mc2 existed before Einstein. An Italian Olinto de Pretto
published E=mc2 in valid scientific journal Lettere ed Atti, Feb. 1904,
two years before Einstein. But Pretto died in 1921, before its
experimental confirmation in nuclear physics.

6. Einstein speculated E=mc2 from L=mc2. What is the problem here?

Firstly derivation of L=mc2 is incomplete or under special conditions
only.
For examples there are many variables in Einstein’s derivation e.g.
number of light waves emitted by body, magnitude of light energy, angle
at which light energy is emitted and relative velocity v. Einstein just
took handpicked values of variables.
If general values of variables are
taken then results are contradictory to experiments.
Secondly Einstein originated E=mc2 on the basis of speculation only
without any conceptual and mathematical basis. Basically Einstein
replaced L by E in equation L=mc2 to get E=mc2.

7. Then how did you derive new equation, dE =Ac2dm (or DE = Ac2 DM )?

I have derived new equation between mass-energy conservation by simple
calculus method. In dE =Ac2dm, A is a co-efficient of proportionality
like numerous others in science. It is dimensionless variable.

Sharma June 2004 paper is available
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf

8. How do you compare these two equations?

Firstly dE =Ac2dm is based upon a conceptual and mathematical
derivation. On the other hand E=mc2 is a speculation, it is bitter
truth. Secondly dE =Ac2dm is a general equation and E=mc2 is its
special case. Energy emitted by new equation can be less, equal to or
more than predicted by E=mc2.

9. How did you justify your equation experimentally?

In Nuclear Physics there are some anomalous results which cannot be
explained by E=mc2 . Like this there are some instances in
astrophysics where my equation is extremely useful.

10. Is your work recognized by international scientific community?

Yes, it is completely recognized, as published in peer review journals.

11 Have you got any recognition certificate from the scientific
community?

The only way to get scientific recognition is that to get the work
published in peer review international journals and conferences. My
research papers are either published in international journals from
America, England and Canada or being published. I have got invitation
from at least 55 International Conferences to present my work. I have
presented my research in international conferences in USA, England,
Germany, Taiwan Ukraine etc. I have invitation from France and Italy
to present my work this year.



13. How do you counter the opposition of the people which has come in
you your way?
Science is the international language. For this, I take seriously the
logical conclusions of the critics. I completely ignore the
irresponsible critics, as they don’t exist.
The critics when understand the things become my supporters.

14. What about your book, 100 Years of E=mc2?

This book is being published soon.
It will bring clear and unbiased picture of the facts. Science today
is not the same in 16th or 17th century. We should aim at 22nd or 23rd
century scientific scenarios.

Book Link :
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


Interviewer Rajesh Thakoor Email mc2.book@xxxxxxxxx


References of Einstein’s work
..
A.Einstein, Annalen der Physik 18 (1905) 639-641.
.. DOES THE INERTIA OF A BODY DEPEND
UPON ITS ENERGY-CONTENT?
Weblink is
Einstein’s 27 Sep 1905 paper available at
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/E_mc2/www/

PartII
References of Ajay Sharma’s work

My work is available at
A. Sharma, Physics Essays, 17 (2004) 195-222.
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
http://www.burningbrain.org/pdf/ajaysharma_einstein.pdf
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554


International Conferences
It has been accepted for presentation over 55 conferences all over the
world
--------------------------------------few of them
1. Sharma, A. presented in 19th International Conference on the
Applications of Accelerators in Research and Industry , 20-25
August , 2006 Fort Worth Texas, USA

2. A. Sharma, Abstract Book 38th European Group of Atomic Systems
(
Euro physics Conference) Isachia (Naples) Italy (2006) 53.

3. A. Sharma , Abstract Book , A Century After Einstein Physics 2005 ,

10-14 April 2005 ( Organizer Institute of Physics , Bristol )
University of Warwick , ENGLAND

4. A. Sharma presented in 5th British gravity Conference , OXFORD
ENGLAND

5. A. Sharma,. Proc. Int. Conf. on Computational Methods in
Sciences and Engineering 2003 World Scientific Co. USA ,
(2003) 585.

6. A. Sharma, Proc. Int. Conf. on Number, Time, Relativity United
Physical Society of Russian Federation, Moscow , (2004) 81
plus more
--------------------------------------
Journals
This paper
”The Origin of Generalized Mass-Energy Equation E = Ac2 M; and
its applications in General physics and Cosmology”.
is published in journal
Physics Essays , CANADA
www.physicsessays.com
The paper
The past ,present and future of E=mc2
will be published in 2007 Galilean Electrodynamics, Massachusetts,
USA.
In parts it is published in various others journals.
----------------------
Book 100 Years of E=mc2
For details
https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=23_48_324&products_id=4554

.