Re: Relativity is wrong because there is a preferred frame of reference
- From: "Josef Matz" <josefmatz@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:11:02 +0100
On Mar 3, 1:19 pm, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In 1893 Ernst Mach stated the so-called Mach Principle:
"For me only relative motion exists. When a body rotates
relative to the fixed stars centrifugal forces are produced.
When it rotates relatively to some different body but not
relative to the fixed stars, no centrifugal forces are
produced.
I have no objection to calling the first "rotation" as long
as it
be remembered that nothing is meant except relative rotation
with respect to the fixed stars."
Now I ask, for two inertial clocks, A and B, moving relatively one
wrt
the other at speed v>0, SR claims A runs slower than B in the frame
of reference where B is at rest, but SR also claims that B runs
slower
than A in the frame of reference where A is at rest. So, which clock
runs actually slower than the other? The answer is simple: that
clock
that moves faster wrt to fixed stars is running slower than the
other.
SR does not incorporate Mach Principle, and that's a serious flaw
Fully right.
Fixed stars should be replaced by distant galaxies and the velocity
against this movement would result in an anisotropic Hubble expansion of
these galaxies.
Another possibility is isotropy of the background radiation which wasnt
known
to Einstein and the people who formed mechanics.
So we have 3 different measures today to evaluate local absolute velocity:
1. Machs Priciple (as you said here)
2. Isotropic Hubble Shift
3. Isotropic background radiation.
And i see it as you: Now you know which clock is running fast and which one
slow.
Yes infact. This solves the non uniqueness problem of SR without changing
any other requirement
of SR.
But another requirement must be changed: Clocks do not measure universal
time.
Universal time is everywhere the same. This changes SR Einstein causality to
general causality.
Now we have the space where we can have potentials act on distance only
(QM),
where we can have superluminal effects for evanescent tunneling waves
(Photons)
and maybe even for evanescent particle waves. In this space we can formulate
a special
relativitistic two body problem with the equivalence principle
Heavy Mass = moved Mass = Both velocity dependent
And place the velocity dependent masses in Newtons gravity law. This will
explain the mercury
perihelion as good as GR.
And if you assume photons bending due to a dynamic mass
m c**2 = hbar w(t)
You can use Newton Gravity to calculate light bending in accordance with 1st
order GR.
Now you can forget GR.
So you are right. Thats the way to solve all problems with relativity.
Josef
.
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Waldron's proof that SR is wrong
- Next by Date: Re: What is Proper Time?
- Previous by thread: Re: Relativity is wrong because there is a preferred frame of reference
- Next by thread: Re: Relativity is wrong because there is a preferred frame of reference
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
