Re: "Another Rebuff to General Relativity By Cosmological Observations"


Retnec wrote:
"Another Rebuff to General Relativity By Cosmological Observations"

Cosmological observations have recently indicated that the "expansion"
of the universe to be faster at extreme distances than it is over most of
its observable volume. There have been attempts to reconcile these
observations with the predictions of General Relativity. These attempts, for
example, resurrected Dr. Einstein's idea of the cosmological constant as a
possible source of a repulsive force to explain this effect. This is rather
startling since one does not have to be a rocket scientist to recognize that
the so-called cosmological constant is the conventional gravitational
constant expressed in terms of the energy represented by the gravitational
masses involved. Obviously if a repulsive force existed which was equal and
opposite to the conventional gravitational force, there would be no net
force to cause the Universe to contract and the static Universe which was
the cosmological belief at the time would result. When the expansion of the
Universe was recognized , Dr. Einstein recanted his belief in the
cosmological constant.

What is overlooked is the fact that when we observe extreme distances
such as exist when we look at the source of the "big bang" or in a
direction opposite to that source we are looking backwards in time. The
description of the "Big bang" tells us that the Universe suddenly appeared
at a point in space which then underwent an almost instantaneous
"inflationary expansion" which then settled down to the more sedate
expansion we presently observe. In other words, at the beginning the rate of
expansion was apparently much larger than it is now. The same effect is to
be expected when we look outward to extreme distances. We are making
observations of events which occurred very early in the history of the
Universe. If, at that time, the Universe was apparently expanding in an
"inflationary" manner, it must also apparently expand in an inflationary
manner at extreme distances. What we should see is that the rate of the
universe's expansion increases at extreme distances, and this is what is
being observed! The only mystery is what is causing the inflation.

When one correctly derives General Relativity the source of the
apparent "inflationary" expansion becomes readily apparent. The strangeness
occurs as a result of Dr. Einstein's incredibly naive error in the
derivation. Correctly derived, General Relativity provides meets all of the
observational tests which are alleged to have verified (valid only in weak
fields such as exist in the Solar system. The corrected gravitational theory
account for:

A:- The observed gravitational force in terms of three dimensional Euclidean
Space (observationally verified).

B:- It is consistent with the ABSOLUTE validity of the Law of Conservation
of Energy.

C:- It eliminates the idea of "Black Holes" since gravitational pressure and
radiation pressure at extreme densities (twice the ABSOLUTE "Event Horizon"
radius or less) gravitational pressure and radiation pressure balance each
other and gravitational collapse ceases. (See
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm.)

D:- The apparent "inflationary expansion" at extreme distances results from
the fact that the ABSOLUTE velocity of light was much higher in the past.

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.

Mr. Retnec in this topic has written: "Everything which we accept as
true 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".
This is a very correct assessment and I'd like to use it as a
reference. In this direction I'd like to mention only three
Einstein's modifications done in physics that do not respect these
very consistent and real assessment.
1) Einstein replaced the Galilei's transformation with the Lorentz
transformation.
2) He changed the Galilei's definition of the principle of the
relativity with his general principle of the relativity. This obviously
is done with the intention to be put in accordance with the principle
of the equivalence.
3) He emitted the principle of the equivalence of the inertial force
with the gravitational field.
Nobody does observations against these unreasonable modifications, but
they try to combat his theory of the relativity with the consequences
that appear in the far cosmic phenomena that are impossible to be
experimentally determined.
I have done observations in mine previous topics but nobody was in
accord with them and nobody has done any contrary argumentations. This
is a strange situation.
I believe that everybody likes to promote his personal theory with
partial remedies of Einstein's theory trying to do an impossible
thing because of the following:
1) The Lorentz transformation is not an approximation done to the
Galilei's transformation, but is an alternative solution, which do
not respect the condition, that this transformation must be
mathematically viable.
2) Einstein changed the definition of the principle of the relativity
with the definition in his general relativity. These two definitions
are contradictory. The Galilei's definition says that the laws of the
mechanics are identical only in the inertial coordinate systems, but
the Einstein's definition says that the laws of the "nature" are
identical and in an accelerated coordinate system. By this we have a
lot of additional paradoxes and hoaxes.
Obviously this modification is done with the aim to be put in accord
his new definition of the principle of the relativity with the
principle of the equivalence of the inertial forces with the
gravitational field.
3) The principle of the equivalence of the inertial forces with the
gravitational field is emitted by a supposition that a chest placed in
a large portion of the space where do not exist gravitational forces,
shall be in a state of inertial motion according to the first law of
the mechanics. But when an imaginary being pulls the chest, a man in
the chest shall feel an inertial force which is similar with the force
which we feel in a room at the earth as a result of the earth gravity.

To conclude that the principle of the equivalence is a correct
assumption is an enormous misjudgment because this similarity appears
as a result of the property of the two forces to act upon every atom of
the mass. On the other hand I have said in a previous topic that we
being in a train in accelerated motion we can't say that the earth is
in an accelerated motion and the train is staying, because it is not
true. The train experiences the accelerate forces and not the earth. So
we can't use at all a coordinate system rigidly attached to a body,
which is in a state of accelerated motion.
If these three modifications done by Einstein could be properly
understood
by physicists, the Einstein theory of the relativity could be thrown
away and nobody would try to mend it partially.
14/01/2007

.