rhertz
2024-09-10 05:42:28 UTC
This post is based on the origin of einstenian relativity, and address
only the content of Einstein's 1905 paper, where Lorentz-Poincaré
transforms were introduced.
The narrative embedded into the paper is based on four main
considerations:
1) The mathematical analysis introduces two reference frames, which
origins are moving with a differential constant velocity v. This pair
could be moving at an absolute and constant velocity V (or not), which
is irrelevant to the analysis developed in the paper. For any further
consideration, both frames are moving along the x-axis, and one of them
(arbitrarily) can be considered at rest with respect to the other.
2) In the entire system under consideration, there is no presence of
masses and forces. Both frames reside in a void universe, where nothing
else exists. Hence, no accelerations are present within the analysis.
3) Time is defined as what clocks shows. The main clock resides at the
origin of the frame considered at rest with respect to the second one,
moving at constant velocity v.
4) As the analysis is performed in vacuum, the speed of light (c) is
considered constant in such context.
So far so good. No objections to the above hypothesis.
WHY THE ASSERTION ABOUT RELATIVITY BEING A PSEUDOSCIENCE? THE FOLLOWING
APPLY:
1) As the distance between both reference frames is increasing
constantly, the communication of data between both frames is IMPOSSIBLE
to exist while exchanging information about time and position of both
frames, even using light as a carrier of data. Both origins will be
always out of sync, even when ghost observers, located at both origins,
are trying to communicate between them.
2) Therefore, the only way to PRETEND that remote data (x,t, x', t') is
KNOWN, is by using a couple of formulae (Lorentz, Poincaré), TO COMPUTE
at each frame time and position of the other frame.
This is THE FATAL CONCEPTUAL ERROR OF RELATIVITY.
Using Lorentz transforms introduces (ARTIFICIALLY: just mathematics), a
NON-LINEAR BEHAVIOR of space and time, which is a mere function of the
differential velocity v.
Due to this, remote sensing IS IMPOSSIBLE, because both frames are being
increasingly separated, and remote sensing is always out of sync.
Considering that the CORE of special relativity is that (Lorentz), time
and space ARE DIFFERENT at each frame, a valid exchange of information
(x,t, x', t') between observers at both frames IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE.
So, the ONLY CHANCE that an observer at any frame has, in order to know
time and space value AT THE OTHER FRAME is TO BELIEVE that mathematics
(not observations) give the desired answers.
Due to the above, believe in relativity IS AN ACT OF FAITH, not on
physics. And this put relativity in the realm of PSEUDOSCIENCE. You have
TO BELIEVE that what Lorentz equations dictate IS TRUE. But you're not
allowed to experimentally verify it. It's a pseudoscience based on
BELIEF because a TWISTED MATHEMATICS (Lorentz) say so.
The only way that relativity makes sense is when v<<c. In this case,
non-linearity of time and space disappear, and the equations become
Newtonian. If v> 0.05c, the Gamma factor (Lorentz) start to kick off,
and you no longer can measure (x,t, x', t') from any of the two
reference frames.
In the first pages of the 1905 paper, the above considerations are
"proudly" presented as a triumph of deductive methods. Einstein insisted
that any observer CAN PERCEIVE the full data (x,t, x', t'), but
PERCEPTION IS NOT WHAT PHYSICAL MEASUREMENTS OBTAIN.
YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE IN LORENTZ EQUATIONS AS THE HOLY GRAIL OF A NEW
PHYSICS.
To make things MUCH WORSE, you HAVE TO BELIEVE that in particle
accelerators, the full set of data is obtained with "real measurements".
But for this to happens, a disgraceful hypothesis has to be introduced:
THAT AT THE END POINT (COLLISIONS OR DECAYS), BOTH REFERENCE FRAMES
MERGES INTO ONE, WHERE DETECTORS ARE LOCATED.
Nothing more stupid and false than this could be asserted in relativity.
Yet most of the members of the relativistic herd BOUGHT THIS ROTTEN FISH
without questioning, or else.
After all, physicists have the right to eat and to maintain a family
(while living in shame).
RELATIVITY HAS BEEN A PSEUDOSCIENCE SINCE THE START. FROM THAT POINT,
OTHER INVENTIONS LIKE SPACETIME are in the same category: PSEUDOSCIENCE.
And better not to talk about GR, which has the fatal flows described
above.
only the content of Einstein's 1905 paper, where Lorentz-Poincaré
transforms were introduced.
The narrative embedded into the paper is based on four main
considerations:
1) The mathematical analysis introduces two reference frames, which
origins are moving with a differential constant velocity v. This pair
could be moving at an absolute and constant velocity V (or not), which
is irrelevant to the analysis developed in the paper. For any further
consideration, both frames are moving along the x-axis, and one of them
(arbitrarily) can be considered at rest with respect to the other.
2) In the entire system under consideration, there is no presence of
masses and forces. Both frames reside in a void universe, where nothing
else exists. Hence, no accelerations are present within the analysis.
3) Time is defined as what clocks shows. The main clock resides at the
origin of the frame considered at rest with respect to the second one,
moving at constant velocity v.
4) As the analysis is performed in vacuum, the speed of light (c) is
considered constant in such context.
So far so good. No objections to the above hypothesis.
WHY THE ASSERTION ABOUT RELATIVITY BEING A PSEUDOSCIENCE? THE FOLLOWING
APPLY:
1) As the distance between both reference frames is increasing
constantly, the communication of data between both frames is IMPOSSIBLE
to exist while exchanging information about time and position of both
frames, even using light as a carrier of data. Both origins will be
always out of sync, even when ghost observers, located at both origins,
are trying to communicate between them.
2) Therefore, the only way to PRETEND that remote data (x,t, x', t') is
KNOWN, is by using a couple of formulae (Lorentz, Poincaré), TO COMPUTE
at each frame time and position of the other frame.
This is THE FATAL CONCEPTUAL ERROR OF RELATIVITY.
Using Lorentz transforms introduces (ARTIFICIALLY: just mathematics), a
NON-LINEAR BEHAVIOR of space and time, which is a mere function of the
differential velocity v.
Due to this, remote sensing IS IMPOSSIBLE, because both frames are being
increasingly separated, and remote sensing is always out of sync.
Considering that the CORE of special relativity is that (Lorentz), time
and space ARE DIFFERENT at each frame, a valid exchange of information
(x,t, x', t') between observers at both frames IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE.
So, the ONLY CHANCE that an observer at any frame has, in order to know
time and space value AT THE OTHER FRAME is TO BELIEVE that mathematics
(not observations) give the desired answers.
Due to the above, believe in relativity IS AN ACT OF FAITH, not on
physics. And this put relativity in the realm of PSEUDOSCIENCE. You have
TO BELIEVE that what Lorentz equations dictate IS TRUE. But you're not
allowed to experimentally verify it. It's a pseudoscience based on
BELIEF because a TWISTED MATHEMATICS (Lorentz) say so.
The only way that relativity makes sense is when v<<c. In this case,
non-linearity of time and space disappear, and the equations become
Newtonian. If v> 0.05c, the Gamma factor (Lorentz) start to kick off,
and you no longer can measure (x,t, x', t') from any of the two
reference frames.
In the first pages of the 1905 paper, the above considerations are
"proudly" presented as a triumph of deductive methods. Einstein insisted
that any observer CAN PERCEIVE the full data (x,t, x', t'), but
PERCEPTION IS NOT WHAT PHYSICAL MEASUREMENTS OBTAIN.
YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE IN LORENTZ EQUATIONS AS THE HOLY GRAIL OF A NEW
PHYSICS.
To make things MUCH WORSE, you HAVE TO BELIEVE that in particle
accelerators, the full set of data is obtained with "real measurements".
But for this to happens, a disgraceful hypothesis has to be introduced:
THAT AT THE END POINT (COLLISIONS OR DECAYS), BOTH REFERENCE FRAMES
MERGES INTO ONE, WHERE DETECTORS ARE LOCATED.
Nothing more stupid and false than this could be asserted in relativity.
Yet most of the members of the relativistic herd BOUGHT THIS ROTTEN FISH
without questioning, or else.
After all, physicists have the right to eat and to maintain a family
(while living in shame).
RELATIVITY HAS BEEN A PSEUDOSCIENCE SINCE THE START. FROM THAT POINT,
OTHER INVENTIONS LIKE SPACETIME are in the same category: PSEUDOSCIENCE.
And better not to talk about GR, which has the fatal flows described
above.