Re: "General Relativity Examined"

On Mar 18, 9:34 am, "Wol" <w...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"General Relativity Examined"

     (See also our sister website reticsessays.com)

     In 1915 Dr. Einstein published the General Theory of Relativity. It
accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants of the Science
of Physics were the same in all reference frames) as a postulate (upon which
Special Relativity was based) and added the Principle of Equivalence. The
Principle of Equivalence asserts that it is not possible to distinguish
between the effects of inertial acceleration and gravitational acceleration.

     In a Force-Length-Time system of units, the Special Theory of
Relativity (STR) can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations
for Force, Length, and Time. (These Transformations plus the fact that
information could not, at least at that time, be transferred faster than the
velocity of light completely explained the effects of velocity in terms
consistent with the idea that an "absolute velocity reference" (i.e.- the
Aether) was not required for evaluating observations (usually ignored is the
fact that the existence of the Aether was not forbidden by STR).

     The appropriate Lorentz Transformations for velocity both as provided
by the Lorentz Transformation-Aether Theory and by Special Relativity are
provided below:

     Force (F)  = 1
     Length (L) = 1/(1-[V/C]^2)^0.5
     Time (T)   = (1-[V/C]^2)^0.5

(All other required transformations can be derived from the above by
applying 19th the Century technique of Dimensional Analysis to known and
well tested physical laws.)

     When one examines the above transformations, he finds that the
Principle of Relativity is satisfied because they have the property of
"multiplicative commutivity". This means that one can use the
transformations to go from one reference frame to another to another
successively and obtain the same result as if he went from the first
reference frame directly to the last. This property occurs in the Lorentz
Transformations because the transformation for energy (force-length product)
and the transformation for time are reciprocal to each other and because
they contain a minus sign which allows the transformation to have a zero
value when V=C. The rotation of axes introduced by the mathematical
treatment of STR results from the fact that the Lorentz Transformations are
identical to the expressions of the Pythagorean theorem. There is no
conflict between the Lorentz Transformation Aether Theory and the Special
Theory of Relativity since the former is a special case solution of the
latter.

     The writer's first had cause to question the validity of General
Relativity in the early 60's when, in studying the mathematics of GTR, he
came across GTR's transformations equivalent to those of STR:

     Force (F)  = 1
     Length (L) = 1
     Time (T)   = G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
     Space (S)  = G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

It will be noted that, in order to solve the equations used in deriving GTR,
Dr. Einstein found it necessary that space be "curved" and thus the
transformation represented by that curvature is also provided.

     The difficulty with the above transformations is that, without a
transformation for energy that was reciprocal to the transformation for
time, GTR cannot satisfy the Principle of Relativity and, since it doesn't,
it must predict that physical laws change as a function of elevation. Such
an effect should quickly become obvious. Since these laws do not appear to
change, even in strong fields, the writer began to search for a better way
of deriving the nature of the gravitational field and to determine where the
mathematics of GTR went wrong. (The subject is amply covered inhttp://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm[1987] at the Website.)

     Examination of the above table also shows that, in addition to
violating the Principle of Relativity, it violates the Principle of
Equivalence because it does not provide transformations that are analogous
to the Lorentz Transformations. The dilation for time is not balanced by a
reciprocal transformation for length and does not contain the minus sign
that would allow the dilation to have a zero or infinite value. With these
transformations, one would obtain the absurd conclusion that a different
result would occur if an elevator going from the first floor to the third
floor happened to stop at the second floor.

     It would appear that GTR is flawed. Not only does it violate its basic
postulates, the Principles of Equivalence and of Relativity, it provides the
strange conclusions associated with GTR (e.g. - curved space, black holes,
singularities, wormholes, incompatibility with Quantum Theory, the existence
of a quantum foam at the scale of 10^-34 meters, Superstring Theory, and its
failure to account for the forces effecting interstellar matter ["dark
matter" and the increasing rate of the Universe's expansion].) Most
significantly, it also leads to the conclusion that the alleged "Big Bang"
origin of the Universe resulted not from an observed expansion of the
location of matter but from an expansion of space itself that will continue
indefinitely. Unfortunately the latter conclusion has several weaknesses. It
requires that energy be continuously added to our Universe from some
unexplained source in gross violation of the First and Second Law of
Thermodynamics and it requires that space must have somewhere in which to
expand that is outside of space. Concluding that space itself is expanding
and that the energy implied by this expansion is continuously being supplied
from an external source is one of the most extreme acts of "Faith" in what
can only be described as a "Religion" built around GTR. The concept
certainly does not meet the requirements of a self consistent fact based
Science.

     Once the correct time dilation for gravity has been determined though a
simple thought experiments relying on basic, well known, and easily testable
physical laws, it is easily shown that the requirement of multiplicative
commutivity and the Principle of Equivalence is satisfied in terms of
Euclidean Space by the following gravity transformations:

     Force (F)  = 1
     Length (L) = 1/G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2
     Time (T)   = G*M1*M2/(R*C)^2

     It should be noted that the above are derived by applying the Rules of
Dimensional Analysis to accepted and readily verifiable physical laws in
simple "thought experiments" and by a second independent method. Analyzing
Dr. Einstein's Elevator Model rigorously and taking into account the
external work being done on the elevator in order to accelerate it "upwards"
(as model theory requires but was not done) yields the identical
transformations. Including the transformation for length increases the
gravitational mass of photons and neutrinos to twice the gravitational mass
of material particles of the same energy content. The effect of the
gravitational transformations is that light is refracted by a gravitational
field, in terms of three dimensional space, by the amount revealed by
astronomical observation. It is also easily shown that the paths of moving
material objects are also refracted by gravitational fields to the same
degree as are photons and neutrinos. The observations that allege to show
that the gravitational field causes space to be
"curved" actually result from this refraction is terms of "flat" space. (The
false conclusion that, while our overall Universe has been shown
observationally to be "flat", space is "curved" in the presence of local
gravitational fields results from that refraction in locally "flat" space..
If this were not true, a perpetual motion machine of the first kind would be
possible in principle, an obvious absurdity.)

     When one apples these transformations to the gravitational field, it is
found that energy in the gravitational field is conserved in the "absolute
sense" because the Principle of Relativity and the reduction in size of the
units of measurement of energy causes a reduction of that "absolute" energy
contained in matter. This reduction in the "absolute" energy of the matter
appears as the energy of fall, and, since the units of measurement for
length are shrinking, space is not expanding but only appears to do so! The
overall universe, as observed from within, must be as has already been
observed, "flat" and it will appear to expand forever, probably at what
appears to be an ever increasing rate.

     The observed expansion does not result from an unexplained repulsive
force acting on the matter contained within it but as a result of the
gaseous pressure exerted by the neutrinos and photons existing in space. The
estimates that the writer has seen of the amount of matter in the known
Universe suggest that the observed electromagnetic radiation of 3 Kelvin's
has an energy of at least 10 times the energy represented by the matter in
the Universe and, as such would have a gravitational mass of at least 20
times the mass of the matter contained in the Universe. In addition, since
the nucleon is 1800 times more massive than the electron, the energy
represented by neutrinos COULD be as large as 1800 times the energy
represented by photons. Following this argument, the combined gravitational
mass of photons and neutrinos in the Universe COULD be as large as 36,000
times as large as the trivial gravitational mass of the matter it contains.
Such a Universe would be reasonably described as a balloon of gaseous
photons and neutrinos containing a minute sprinkling of matter "dust".
(These results are shown in "Gravity" copyright 1987.) Also shown is that
the observations that allegedly validated GTR are a natural result of the
transformations in the above table without the need for the artificiality of
"curved space."

     It has always puzzled the writer as to why photons and neutrinos are
considered to be "massless" particles. They clearly possess inertial mass as
evidenced by the radiation pressure exhibited by light, and they can be
shown to possess gravitational mass. The fact that they do not possess a
"rest mass" would hardly seem to justify considering them to be massless
since they do not exist unless they are traveling at the velocity of light.
Maintaining correct definitions is important if one's thinking is to be
accurate.

     The test of any physical theory is whether it agrees with the results
of mathematical analysis and with all of the relevant observations. The
generation of General Relativity contains a mathematical error that would
not be tolerated if made by a student of freshman calculus. As a result, the
derivation could not be completed without adding the extra degree of freedom
that the artificiality of non-Euclidean geometry provides. General
Relativity agrees with observation only with respect to 1st order effects,
hence its apparent agreement with observation in the extremely weak
gravitational fields in the Solar System. (The observation limit is at least
5 orders of magnitude too coarse to reveal GTR's 2nd order errors and allows
the acceptance of the current absurdities.) When the appropriate corrections
are made, the alleged "Big Bang" origin of the Universe is seen to be a
natural process of gravitational collapse as observed from the interior of
the collapsing object late in its history. Most importantly, General
Relativity contains a zero order error with respect to gravitational force
and energy and as a result it cannot explain the force that holds you to
your chair and the energy that injures you when you fall. (This should be
the prime purpose of any gravitational theory.) A treatment based upon the
gravity transformations consistent with the Principle of Equivalence as
listed above seems to meet all of the requirements.

     One might ask how General Relativity could be wrong. The answer is that
its derivation applied the mathematical process of integration and attempted
to use the results of that integration to derive the constants of the terms
to be integrated. If any student of elementary calculus repeatedly attempted
to perform such an operation, he would find himself repeating the course. In
order to overcome the effects of his mathematical mistake, Dr. Einstein
resorted to the fiction that space is "curved" and that gravity results from
that curvature. This, despite the fact that an intelligent man should
immediately recognize that such a curvature cannot produce the force which
hold you to your chair any more than the curve of the Earth's surface can
impel you to move from New York to Chicago. When examining the history of
General Relativity, it is hard to understand how such an error could have
been made unless one or more of the following were true:

     1:-  Dr. Einstein did not understand the physical significance
of Relativity.

     2:-  He did not understand the rules of integral calculus.

snip

or 3. The einsteinhoax people are hoplessly ignorant. and produces
tons of spam.

Uncle Ben
.

Relevant Pages

  • "General Relativity Examined"
    ... It accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants ... Relativity can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations ... Once the correct time dilation for gravity has been determined ...
    (sci.physics)
  • "General Relativity Examined"
    ... It accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants ... Relativity can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations ... Once the correct time dilation for gravity has been determined ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • "General Relativity Examined"
    ... It accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants ... Relativity can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations ... Once the correct time dilation for gravity has been determined ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • "General Relativity Examined"
    ... In 1915 Dr. Einstein published the General Theory of Relativity. ... accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants of the Science ... Relativity can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations ... (The subject is amply covered in "Gravity" ...
    (sci.physics)
  • "General Relativity Examined"
    ... In 1915 Dr. Einstein published the General Theory of Relativity. ... accepted the Principle of Relativity (the laws and constants of the Science ... Relativity can be expressed in terms of the Lorentz Transformations ... (The subject is amply covered in "Gravity" ...
    (sci.physics.particle)