Re: Article: A Century of Einstein

From: Ole D. Rughede (ole.rughede_at_privat.dk)
Date: 10/17/04 

Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 00:47:37 +0200

Hello freshman!

We were discussing a serious problem here to which
you add some innocent babble, and from which you
have removed essential arguments.

Now, this is a public forum where anybody, including
you, may demonstrate your ignorance.

I suggest you take a talk with your mentor. But before
bothering your physics professor, be sure to understand
the problem in question:

"Bilge" <dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net> wrote
 news:slrncmv6ks.4o7.dubious@radioactivex.lebesque-al.net...

> Ole D. Rughede:
> >
> >Pardon, but it seems we have a very serious problem.
> >
> >If namely GR in any possible way could reduce to SR,
> >and if SR is a false theory, then also GR is false.
>
> [Bilge]
> By thesame tokem since special relativity reduces to newtonian
> mechanics, if newtonian mechanics is false, special relativity
> could be false amd therefore general relativity could be false.

In physics we have to distinguish between tokens and
forcing logic. Special Relativity, which is a false physical
theory of empty space, that is found nowhere in the whole
universe, cannot /reduce/ to Newtonian mechanics of the
real world of masses, fields, and forces in space and time.

Much in physics "could be, if so and so". It is much more
interesting to hear why in physics things are what they are,
because of forcing logical reasons.

Since SR was so defined by Einstein as the false abstract
"physics of empty space", it is out of question to /augment/,
/expand/, or /extend/ SR to any real world physics.

> [Bilge]
> On the other hand, if newtonian mechanics was correct, we wouldn't
> have special relativity, and if special relativity was correct,
> we wouldn't have general relativity. Is there a point there somewhere
> other than stream-of-consciousness non-sequiters?

This is solid babble, as you probably can see yourself by
a closer look. Newtonian mechanics is perfectly correct
at its own premisses and is widely trusted in every day's
physics by all knowing people. It has its shortcomings when
asking beyond Newtonian premises, which is why General
Relativity is believed to remedy the problems in better ways.

That the false SR theory of empty space was made first and
became a sort of step-stone to General Relativity does not
make SR any more valid, but /obsolete/, while the contrary,
that SR should in any way make Newtonian mechanics and
General Relativity superfluous, is completely out of question.

For reasons I have given, stating the problem of falseness in
SR, not even corrections of SR by definition of a Lambda
term from GR with a constant radiant energy density u and
a constant pressure p = u/3 in all SR space in consideration
would validate the unphysical massless SR, because it has
still no idea of the Newtonian G and the Maxwell-Lorenz
constant c and their dependence of Aether energy density u.

Without masses or massive fixpoints in the SR space, not
even length L, or Time T, or any velocity L/T has meaning
or any existence. They are only abstract ideas of extension
that cannot be measured relative to any physical objects.

Space, time, velocity, frequencies, wavelengths, or physical
fields therefore do not exist in SR, and it won't help you to
snip my arguments, pretending that such serious critics were
never raised with forcing logic and in valid physical terms of
undoubtedly reality.

> >We assume the GR -> SR reduction follows from the
> >physical concept of mass-less space, where no force
> >of gravitation acts. That is not to say the Newtonian G
> >equals zero. It is saying that \Sigma m_n = M = zero.
> >
> >Such conditions are found nowhere in the world, why
> >the idea is false because of lack of reality. - But since
> >SR is based on such conditions, we conclude that SR
> >is a false theory of physics,
>
> Strictly speaking, the existence of general relativity implies that
> someone recognized this fact as early as 1916. Since then, the news
> has spread like wildfire and now, almost everyone is aware of it.

Strictly spoken babble. But any way an act of admission!

> >while it may very well be true for the abstract geometric - but
> >quite unphysical - conditions of empty space it was made for.
>
> [Bilge]
> Apart from the fact that general relativity uses the same
> concept known as spacetime.

Newtonian physics and General Relativity operates in terms
of the real world. The concept of space-time existed before
the invention of SR and brings no reality to the SR-illusion of
space-time in empty space, or any other physical reality to SR.

The reality of General Relativity thus can on no account prove
any reality of the empty space of Special Relativity founded on
three /assumptions/ claimed as /principles/: The non-existence in
physics of the concept of absolute rest, called "the principle of
relativity"; and that light in empty space always propagates with
a certain velocity V independent of the movements of the light-
-emitting bodies. Further assuming non-existence of the Aether.
> >
> >However, Einstein's SR postulate that the velocity of
> >light in empty space is a universal constant V cm/sec
> >according to experience is certainly not an empirical
> >fact experienced anywhere in the physical world, why
> >SR is fundamentally wrong; and it is even false at the
> >abstract conditions at which it should be valid.
>
> [Bilge]
> Au contraire. It's a physical fact everywhere in the world to any
level
> of precision anyone has been able to measure. Even were it not a fact,
as
> indeed is a possibility (slim, but not completely out of the
question),
> who cares? That just means light doesn't propagate at `c', but `c' is
> still a constant. That some velocity `c' exists is certainly a fact
and
> you can calculate it from the upper limit on the photon mass. There is
a
> serious problemm but it can be remedied through your investment in a
good
> basics physics textbook.

It is unclear whether you intend to decieve your readers,
or if you just suffer from some kind of self-deception.
Calculations presupposes exact measurements in the real
world. - In empty space nothing can be measured.

The velocity of light has never been measured in true
empty space void of all gravitating masses and with an
energy density of zero at the absolute temperature of
zero degrees Kelvin. Such conditions are found nowhere
in the universe, and can never be realized artificially.

I have shown that the constancy of light-velocity c in
space far from gravitating masses depends on the energy
density u of the radiant energy in space called the Aether;
everywhere in the universe of a definite local temperature
T(Aether) proportional in the 4th power to the density u.
The Aether is a product of real radiating bodies in space
and time.

It is precisely this Aether-condition that falsely and tacitly
is used to postulate the "validity" of Special Relativity by
measurements of c = 2.99792458E10 cm/sec, though
this condition is by no means clarified or even mentioned
by Einstein with his invention of "empirical facts" regarding
the velocity of light in empty space, and allthough his later
amendment with the Lambda-term to the General Relativity
has been so much doubted and was at times even called
by himself his "greatest blunder".

So perhaps, dear freshman Bilge, you would please inform
us in which good basic physics textbook this empirical fact
of tacitly fraud in physics is described to correspond with
Einstein's original SR-denial of the Aether, luckily withdrawn
15 years later, but still without precise idea of the universal
Aether of radiant electromagnetic energy, the space-time-
energetic continuum on which the light velocity c depends.

Einstein's SR-proof:
"Die betrachtete Welle ist also auch im bewegten System
betrachtet eine Kugelwelle von der Ausbreitungsgeschwin-
digkeit V. Hiermit ist gezeigt, dass unsere beiden Grund-
prinzipien miteinander vereinbar sind",

is nothing but a worthless repeating his own presupposed
assumptions made into conditions (Voraussetzungen):

"Wir wollen diese Vermutung (deren Inhalt im folgenden
"Prinzip der Relativität" genannt werden wird) zur Voraus-
setzung erheben und ausserdem die mit ihm nur scheinbar
unverträgliche Voraussetzung einführen, dass sich das Licht
im leeren Raume stets mit einer bestimmten, vom Bewe-
gungszustande des emittierende Körpers unabhängigen
Geschwindigkeit V fortpflanze".

To restore what you have tried to repress, I repeat my
remaining original words about the problem in discussion:

To set V = c = 2.99792458E10 cm/sec would no
way better the situation, but adds further to falseness
of the Special Theory of Relativity and its postulates
of relativity.

SR seems to reflect the idea of Galilean-Newtonian
physics, why we have to consider that some changes
are needed in Newton's fundamental laws:

1. A body on which no /net/ forces are acting remains
at rest or moves with constant velocity.

2. The acceleration of a body is proportional to the
force acting on it.

3. Action and reaction are equal and opposite, /i.e.
antiparallel in case of bodies at rest, otherwise dis-
placed to or deviating from a parallel direction/.

Since forces are acting in time, there is in the time
\delta t a displacement between action- and reaction-
directions of forces in case of moving bodies.

Now these fundamental laws are supposed to hold
for a single body in empty space, deduced from
experience by innumerable physical experiments.

But when empty space is nowhere to be found, we
conclude the idea should be that Newtonian laws
are valid everywhere in the universal space far from
all gravitating masses, meaning at such positions in
space where the forces of gravity acting on a single
test-body are equal in all directions, why no external
net-forces are acting on that body.

In other words: Left alone in space at such positions,
our test-body remains at rest, weight-less. But given
some velocity it will immediately behave under a force
of gravity in the direction of movement.

The static situation of rest says nothing about the real
magnitude of the acting gravitational forces. They may
have any possible one and same value in all directions.

Having so clarified what should be understood by the
Galilean-Newtonian dynamics in real physical space,
we may turn to the problem of Einstein's velocity of
light V in empty space, meaning at positions in space
where a test-body remains at rest relative to all other
masses in the whole universe.

According to the Aether Equation we see that both
the Newtonian G and the velocity of light c depends on
the specific local energy of the aether U at the position
of our test-body, when U erg is the radiant energy in
the local space irradiated from all astrophysical bodies
in the universe:

                kappa*U*V = G*h*c^2
  at T(Aether) = T(CMBR) = 2.692064 Kelvin.

kappa = 1 cm^2/g*sec^3 = 1 erg/sec*g^2
U = 3.973637E-13 erg
V = 1 cm^3
G = 6.672426E-8 cm^3/g*sec^2
h = 6.626176E-27 erg*sec
c = 2.99792458E10 cm/sec

The Newtonian factor of proportionality G therefore
is a local variable defining the actual force of gravity
acting on a test-body, and since c^2 is proportional
to U/G with U of another proportionality to G*c^2,
the velocity c is certainly not constant and the same
everywhere in the real physical space, meaning that
c is also a variable, and rays of light are deflected by
the fields of gravity, whereby light loses energy and
becomes red-shifted according to experience.

Such are the real physical conditions, as it seems,
and unless SR be modified to comply with this, it is
still a false pysical theory and should be avoided or
fall completely in favour of GR, applicable to the
physics of the real world in space-time only of final
extension, provided careful definition of the Lambda
term for the local aether energy density u erg/cm^3
and the local aether pressure p = u/3 dyn/cm^2.

The relation of coefficients x to U, y to G, and z to c
in kappa*(xU)*V = (yG)*h*(zc)^2, meaning that
x = y*z^2, should then possibly be found from the
studies of differential velocities of galactic spins, and
from experiments in low energy physics below the
temperature of the cosmic background radiation,
T(CMBR) = 2.692064 Kelvin, where G may attain
magnitudes less than the ordinary 6.67E-8, hitherto
- but falsely - considered as an universal constant.

Flat Euclidian space-time and Galilean-Newtonian
dynamics are abstract ideas that cannot be realized
exact anywhere in the universe.

The Aether of radiant energy as the space-time-
energetic continuum, which is the medium of all fields
and forces in physics, should be considered from
thermodynamic reasons, as already indicated in GR
by the Lambda term, as well as by the mass-energy
tensor and the fact that mass /and/ energy gravitates.

Embedding 4D GR in 5D Kaluza-Klein with the
aether parameters as the 5th dimension seems to
enable the unification of all physical forces, and make
an end to the speculative idea of big bang as a mere
4D illusion, meaning that the ongoing creation of new
stars and galaxies from present mass and energy in the
universe, conserving mass, energy, and momentum,
seems realities that may be real subjects of physics.

         V * L / c * u / Kh = 1 dimensionless
      at T(Aether) = T(CMBR) = 2.692064 Kelvin.

             UL / hc = Gc / kappa*L^2 = K.
L = 1 cm, u = U/V, K = 2.000343E3 dimensionless.

Ole D. Rughede

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Has the speed of light emitted by a fast moving particle been measured ?
    ... | Does that stop you from measuring, for example, your average speed ... Light with the Principle of Relativity. ... THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according ... that the velocity of light in our theory plays the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: GPS GR Correction Myth.
    ... we shall, however, find in what follows, that the velocity ... It denies an axiom, the Principle of Relativity. ... "Albert Einstein. ... THERE is hardly a simpler law in physics than that according ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
    ... The Science of Physics is based upon the making of measurements. ... another degree of freedom was added to the concept of measurement ... velocity is attributed to Dr. Einstein who showed, ... Special theory of Relativity, ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
    ... The Science of Physics is based upon the making of measurements. ... another degree of freedom was added to the concept of measurement ... velocity is attributed to Dr. Einstein who showed, ... Special theory of Relativity, ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • "The Error in Relativistic Physics"
    ... The Science of Physics is based upon the making of measurements. ... another degree of freedom was added to the concept of measurement ... velocity is attributed to Dr. Einstein who showed, ... Special theory of Relativity, ...
    (sci.physics)