Re: Special Relativity is Dead! (Third Proof)

On Nov 19, 2:25 am, jan.verh...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

If I am well informed, constant velocity movement causes time delation,
according to Special Relativity.

According to SR, any observed non-zero speed will result in observed
time dilation, not just constant speed.

Acceleration causes also time dilation, according to General Relativity.

It is a wishful thinking by Einstein and generations of his followers.
There is no proof either experimentally or theoretically under the
concept of GR that a time dilation exists for acceleration. However,
according to GR, gravity does somehow mysteriously manifest time
dilation. The exact mechanism of how gravitational time dilation comes
about other than a curvature in spacetime is still a mystery.

Anyone with some
mathematical intuition and some feeling of how nature works can know
now that Relativity (Special as well as General) CANNOT be valid,
without considering the details of both theories.

That is very correct. You can also back up your claim through the
mathematics involved with SR and GR.

Velocity and acceleration are two completely different things, seen
from a mathematical viewpoint. They are related as derivative and
integral to each other. If both constant velocity and constant
acceleration lead to the same phenomena (time delation) you have messed
up things. It would be the same as if both acceleration and constant
velocity would cause (reaction)force.

Yes, this is another excellent point. Thank you. Confusing speed with
acceleration was how Einstein predicted the gravitational time
dilation. Knowing the history also helps tremendously on identifying
the phony nature of SR and GR.

In the time before Newton and Galilei, people thought that force is
required for both constant velocity and (extra force) for acceleration.

And it should still be.

It was not yet discovered that if you remove all drag (which is very
difficult or impossible in practice), constant velocity requires no
force for its maintenance. Twentyfirst physicists should have learned
this lesson.

21st-century physicists worship Einstein. GR becomes a religion. When
someone is faithful, you cannot talk any sense out of them even
presenting basic mathematics to prove so.

A quantity and its derivative (or integral) CAN NEVER HAVE
the same physical consequences, because they are entirely different
things, and in fact orthogonal. A theory in which a quantity and its
derivative have the same or similar effect (time delation in this case)
can NEVER be consistent.

?

I have read many textbooks on Special and General Relativity, among
which the text of mister Einstein himself,

Einstein's 1905 paper on relativity is full of errors. Einstein's
book later on does no improvement.

and the famous "Lectures" of
Feynman. Virtually no writer discriminates consequently between
acceleration because of externally applied force, and acceleration
because of a freefall in a gravitation field. If I understood General
Relativity well, acceleration due to freefall in a gravitation field
causes no time delation because the free falling object is just taking
the "path of least resistance" in warped space.

In the proper interpretation to GR, gravitational time dilation is not
caused by acceleration but from gravity itself. However, acceleration
between inertial and gravitational is the same according to Galileo's
principle of Equivalence. You can finally prove that through the
geodesic equations following the path of the least resistance in warped
space[time] as you have pointed out. What is this resistance you have
in mind?

It is as if it were
inertial. If we take the words of mister Einstein seriously, we can
corner his idiot theory of Special Relativity in less than twenty lines
of plain english text. No equations required.

I can do it in two words --- Twin's Paradox.

[...]

Peels of laughter......

Indeed.

How is it possible that so many intelligent people (at least they
pretend...) cling to theories that are no more than rediculous
nonsense?

Intelligent? They don't even understand basic math. They rely on
voodoo mathematics to cover up that religion of theirs.

Billions of dollars have been spend on research projects that
assume Special Relativity as if it were an axiom. Wasted! Mister
Einstein was one of the biggest jokers that science has known. He has
misled the world for more than 100 years (101 if I am well informed)
with a fallacy that is so convoluted that everyone thought it was
brilliant.

If you know the history, Einstein played no role in the development of
SR. In GR, Einstein played a very minimal role. The screw-ups in SR
and GR are not Einstein's doing or faults.

[...]

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Harald V, suggestions taken
    ... Special relativity tells us that the amount of time experienced by a ... The acceleration is the negative derivative of a "potential." ... Newtonian gravity works extremely well, ... Let's look at the problem of two bodies of equal mass orbiting each ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Harald V, suggestions taken
    ... Newtonian gravity works extremely well, ... But let's say the pilot observes some dust ... > Our pilot would observe the acceleration of the other craft to be ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Harald V, suggestions taken
    ... I was saying General Relativity indicates time dilation from acceleration ... > from curved space (interpreted as gravity). ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Harald V, suggestions taken
    ... > I was saying General Relativity indicates time dilation from acceleration ... > only occurred from gravity which is a manifestation of curved space based ... A rocket after undergoing time dilation through ... >> observer sees this object being under acceleration. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Relativ-ism
    ... body of some other mass. ... The Earth and its mass is really a red herring in the classic twin paradox from special relativity; in fact, special relativity can't handle gravity. ... In practice, you need very strong gravitational fields for gravitational time dilation to be significant, and the Earth's mass doesn't qualify. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.science)