A COMPARITION OF ACHIEVENENTS BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
- From: Stamenin <tasko.s@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:13:11 -0700
A COMPARITION OF ACHIEVEMENTS BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
In the discussions of the group Science-Physics-Relativity are treated
different questions in physics but in all of them the principal topic
is the speed of light and the priority given to the gravitational
fields especially to their speed of propagation. Speaking only about
these two notions is impossible to do real experiments and to have a
real conclusion. Is known the conclusion done with the occasion of the
appreciation of the Einstein theory that nobody can refute it and on
this logic was accepted as real. In this direction I believe that is a
good approach to do a parallel survey about the assumptions and the
achievements obtained by Newton and Einstein. I believe that this
approach shall help to see that the Einstein relativity is complete
errant theory.
1) The Galilei- Newton basic assumptions and achievements could be the
following:
1.1) The first law of the Mechanics. (v=const). Or (a=0) from the
second law.
1.2) The absolute inertial system.
1.3) The Galilei transformation, x1=v.t+x2.
1.4) The Galilei definition of the Principle of the relativity: The
laws of the mechanics are identical in all coordinate systems that are
in motion in a straight line and with constant relative speed.
1.5) The second law of the mechanics. (Fi=a.m)
1.6) The third law of the mechanics. (Fe=-Fi) where Fe is an external
force acting upon a material body and Fi is the inertial force of that
body.
1.7) The law of the universal attraction: F=k.M.m/r^2.
2) The Einstein basic assumptions and achievements could be:
2.1) The Lorentz Transformation. x1=1/R(v.t2+x2), t1=1/R(t2+v.x2/c^2)
where
R=1/[1-(v/c)^2]^0.5.
2.2) The principle of the relativity in the restricted sense. If
relative to K, K' is a uniformly moving coordinate system devoid
of rotation, the natural phenomena run their course with respect to K'
according to exactly the same general laws as with respect to K.
2.3) The principle of the constancy of the light speed relative to the
coordinate system from which we look at it.
2.4) The Galileian coordinate system: A system of coordinates of which
the state of motion is such that the law of inertia holds
relative to it is called "Galileian system of coordinates".
2.5) The principle of the equivalence of the inertial force with the
gravitational field.
2.6) The General Principle of the Relativity: All Gaussian coordinate
systems are essentially equivalent for the formulation of the general
laws of the nature.
If we like to do a comparative analysis between these two theories,
there is evident that in Galilei- Newton theory exits a dubious
situation only for the position 1.2) about the absolute inertial
system for which I have concluded that is impossible to be determined,
but the motion of the material bodies is done relatively to this
system. The same situation exists and for the determination of the
position 2,4) for the Einstein's definition about the Galileian
coordinate system and there isn't any difference in comparison to the
absolute system of coordinates.
The Einstein's other assumptions are all mistaken. I have shown
that, in my participation in Google group, sci-physics-relativity and
I can do it again for every position. These mistakes are the cause,
why in Einstein theory are so many strange conclusions as there are,
the relativity of the time, the relativity of the distance and mass. A
rod of 1m and a mass of 1kg becomes with an infinite mass and zero
length when v=infinite, that this theory is incompatible with
Euclidean geometry, the strange conclusion that the cosmos is not
infinite but is unbounded, the assumption that an accelerated
coordinate system could be considered as inertial system. All these
conclusions and others are done because Einstein took the Lorentz
transformation as being a correct mathematical relation, and because
he didn't understand what is an inertial force of the material body,
and what is a gravitational force. From these not understandings
appears the principle of the equivalence, and to be in accordance with
it, the definition of the general principle of the relativity and
finally the General relativity. All these conclusions I'd say are
mistaken. The principal cause for this situation is the assumption
that the light has a mass (m) and is put in the same category with the
material bodies in respect to their motions, and the confusion done
with the assumption that the inertial force is identical with the
gravitational force and consequently with the gravitational field.
If anybody likes to see the inconsistency of the Einstein theory I
advise to make a comparison between the three definitions of the
principle of the relativity, (the Galilei definition and the two
Einstein definitions). And finally to compare these definitions with
the principle of the equivalence and with the conclusion that a
coordinate system in accelerated motion relative to an inertial
coordinate system can be considered as being an inertial system too.
12/08/2007.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: Eric Gisse doesn't know proper time thus nothing about spacetime
- Next by Date: Re: The Inertia of Stress (Attn: Tom Roberts)
- Previous by thread: spam
- Next by thread: Re: A COMPARITION OF ACHIEVENENTS BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
