A SHORT COMPARITION BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
- From: Stamenin <tasko.s@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:25:42 -0700 (PDT)
A COMPARITION OF ACHIEVEMENTS BETWEEN NEWTON AND EINSTEIN
In discussions of the group Science-Physics-Relativity are treated
different questions in physic 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. There is known the conclusion done with the occasion
of the appreciation of Einstein theory of relativity, that nobody can
refute it and on this logic was accepted as being real theory. 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 and to see which of them the correct theory is. I believe
that this approach shall help us to see that Einstein theory of
relativity is completely 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) resulting
from the second law of the mechanic, Fi=m.a
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 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 external
force acting upon a material body and Fi is the inertial force of that
body with which opposes to the external force.
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-(v/c)^2]^0.5.
2.2) The Principle of the relativity in the restricted sense. If
relative to K, K’ is an 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 observe 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 only one dubious
situation 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 are done relatively to this system
if we do not have gravitational forces. I named such a system as being
ideal coordinate systems and the system which exists in presents of
gravitational forces as being real and approximate system of
coordinates.
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. All other positions of Newton theory are
unanimously recognized as being correct.
In Einstein’s theory the other assumptions are all mistaken. I have
shown it 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
the relativity of the mass. A rod of 1m and mass of 1kg becomes with
an infinite mass and zero length when (v=>infinite).
Einstein theory is incompatible with Euclidean geometry, it can’t be
used for (v variable in LT), is incompatible with superior
mathematics, and here are 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 a material body, and
what is a gravitational force.
From these not understandings he emitted the principle of theequivalence, and to be in accordance with it, the definition of the
general principle of the relativity and finally the General
relativity. All these conclusions obviously are mistaken. The
principal cause for this situation is the assumption that the light
has a mass (m) and is put at the same category with the material
bodies relative 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 of
relativity 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.
Stamenin.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Foundation of GR?
- Next by Date: Re: Gauge Relativity Theory
- Previous by thread: "The Limitations of Mathematics in Physics"
- Next by thread: Meaning of gravity field debate - what is acceleration? Do we need curvature?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
