Friday, July 1, 2011

Arguments that Invalidate Relativity Theory.

Relativity has two fundamental postulates–

1.      the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
2.      that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.

The following problems arise from the above two postulates and relativity theory developed in Einstein’s 1905 paper entitled on the electrodynamics of moving bodies.

§ - 1

The equations of mechanics that hold good assumes an absolute reference frame as absolute space in Newtonian mechanics and also infer an ether in Maxwell’s equations.
Yet light is not said to be dependent and therefore have a speed relative to the ether, but relative to an empty space inertial frame.
As the empty space inertial frame does not exist in Newtonian mechanics and the ether is denied in relativity, but affirmed in Maxwell’s equations, then relativity is based upon a postulate that contradicts the foundations of other physics theories, which it purports to maintain.
As relativity both affirms and denies the absolute space and ether, then relativity theory is contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 2

Relativity assumes the equations of mechanics hold good.
Newtonian mechanics says gravity is caused by mass attraction
Relativity says gravity is caused by the bending of the space-time continuum
But the space time continuum is not mass attraction.
Therefore relativity is not based upon “the equations of mechanics hold good”
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 3

Relativity is based upon the notion that light is at c in empty space
But relativity says space is a continuum of space and time that bends to cause gravity around bodies
As the space time continuum permeates all space within the universe, then space-time is always bent around many bodies
As the bending of space time means space has properties, then space is never empty
As space is never empty, then the propagation of light through empty space never occurs in the real.
As a postulate of relativity is not based upon the real as described by relativity, then relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 4

Relativity says the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
As such the laws of optics dictate that light at c in an inertial frame of any velocity propagate at c+-v according to the sagnac effect.
A light propagated at c+-v in an inertial frame is connected to the rest of the universe, which is empty space
Therefore light propagation at c+-v in an inertial frame means the light will naturally propagate in empty space at c+-v
However relativity says light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
Therefore relativity postulate contradicts experimental phenomena
Therefore the equations of mechanics do not hold good
Therefore relativity theory is contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 5

Light is propagated in empty space at c
But if light is always propagated in space at c, then light has a universal relation to empty space of c.
A universal relation to another is an absolute.
A relation is a “be towards another.” For example, a father has a relation of fatherhood to his son and the son has a relation of sonship to his father. If the boy is not a thing and therefore has no properties, then the boy cannot have a relation to his father and as such the father cannot have a relation to his son. For to have a relation of fatherhood, without the boy (or the girl) really existing, means a man can be a father, without having any children.
But to have the relation of fatherhood, implies another thing really existing (the son or daughter), with properties in that thing existing.
Therefore the relation of father, without son or daughter is absurd.
As such a relation of one to another, without the other having any properties that cause that relation is an absurdity.
Therefore to have the relation of fatherhood, without the son or daughter existing, is absurd.

As light has a universal relation to empty space, then relativity theory requires a relation which is absolute.
But this absolute relation is not caused by empty space, for empty space has no properties.
Therefore the absolute relation of light to empty space must have another cause.
This other cause is light itself, the ether, or the inertial frame.

If light causes the absolute relation to empty space, then light must have properties not only from itself, but also in relation to another.
But to have properties in relation to another, means the other must also be a thing and therefore have properties
But empty space is not a thing and does not have properties, therefore light cannot of itself always travel at c in relation to empty space.
But relativity says light is always propagated at c in empty space
Therefore relativity is absurd.

Other options for light propagation in empty space as an absolute relation, is the ether, or the inertial frame.
But relativity denies the existence of the ether, therefore the ether does not cause light propagation at c.
The inertial frame, which is moving at any velocity v, must then cause light to propagate at c in empty space.
But this requires the same absurdity found above concerning relation to another, when the other (empty space) has no properties.
As such, relativity theory has no cause for propagation of light in empty space at c.
As there is no cause posited and no logical reason posited for the relation, then relativity theory is not scientific, but claims to be a theory in science.
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 6

Light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
This statement has an explicit reference to propagation of light through space at c and an implicit claim that light is propagated from bodies moving at v.
So light is propagated from a body at v, meaning light must be initially propagated and therefore moving relative to a body at c+-v
The speed of light is therefore initially dependent upon the velocity of the body in an inertial frame.
But the speed of light is also independent of the velocity of a body and its inertial frame, when traveling through space.
Therefore light speed is both dependent and independent of body velocity
And light speed is also both dependent and independent of the absolute empty space.
Therefore relativity theory requires a notion of light speed that is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 7

Relativity states light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
This means that when a body is moving at v, then light is emitted from the body at some velocity.
When light is emitted at some velocity, then this velocity is equivalent to c in empty space.
So if a body with velocity v, emits light, it does so either at c, or not at c.
If a body with velocity v, emits light at c, then that light will propagate through empty space at c+-v, or c.
If the light is propagated through space at c+-v, then light acts contrary to relativity.
If the light in front of the body is propagated through empty space at c, then light must either be emitted from a body moving body with velocity v, at c-v, or at c.

If light is emitted at c-v, in front of a moving body with velocity v, then the properties of inertial frame are specified from the empty space as the absolute reference frame, whereby light is always propagated and therefore fixed at c.
But to have an absolute reference frame that dictates the propagation of light at c, contradicts relativity, concerning the relativity of inertial frames.
Also, to have light emitted at c-v, in front of a moving body with velocity v, infers light will be emitted at many velocities, according to the variation of velocity v.
But to be emitted at many velocities, relative to v, and therefore propagate through empty space at c, means light is propagated according to an absolute property throughout the universe.
For example body 1 moves at v = 10km/s and body 2 moves at v=100km/s. Therefore according to relativity, body 1 emits lights at c-10km/s and body 2 emits light at c-100km/s
But this means each body must be turned into the property of empty space, whereby light is always emitted at the speed required to have light propagated through empty space at c.
But empty space is a cause of light speed propagation
But empty space does not have any properties
Therefore either empty space causes all light to be emitted at c-v, but this is a breach of causality
For empty space is not a cause and as such cannot be a cause of light speed emission.
And therefore empty space must have at least one property, to cause all light to propagate at c, therefore relativity requires empty space to be not empty.
But this is self contradictory, therefore relativity is self contradictory.

If light is emitted at c, then the velocity of the body is not relevant to light emission speed.
But relativity requires light speed emission conforms to mechanical laws
But mechanical laws include the sagnac effect
The sagnac effect says light emission is not always at c, but is at c+-v
Therefore if light is always emitted from a moving body, at c
Then light is emitted against the mechanical laws held to by relativity theory.
As such if light is emitted from a moving body at c, then it conforms to light propagation through empty space at c, but disconforms to the mechanical laws relativity holds to in the sagnac effect.
Therefore relativity states the mechanical laws are the same in all inertial frames, but requires a disconformity with those laws in a moving frame.
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

If a body moves with v>c, then light emitted in front of the moving body is emitted with a negative velocity to have light propagate through empty space at c.
But to be propagated in front of a body requires a positive light speed.
Therefore relativity theory requires both a positive and a negative light emission speed from a body moving at more than c.
But this is self contradictory, therefore relativity is contradictory.

If a body moves at v, then light propagation is not accounted for in relativity theory, without self contradiction.
But self contradiction means the theory is not logical
But an illogical theory does not account for the real
Therefore relativity theory does not account for the real
But a theory must account for the real for the theory to be science
Therefore relativity theory is not science.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 8

Relativity states light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
Therefore, if a body moves at v and light is emitted from that body and light is then propagated at c through empty space, then –

1. The light emitted from the body moving at v, is dependent upon the velocity of the body.
But the velocity of the body is relative to either another body or empty space.
If the velocity of the body is only relative to another body, then the velocity of the body is only relative to another local thing.
But to have a velocity relative to another local body, means the velocity is not known as an absolute, but only a relative.
But to have a relative velocity to another body does not link the velocity of the body to that of empty space.
For example – body 1 moves relative to body 2. Body one has velocity v1 relative to velocity v2.
Therefore the relative velocity of Body 1 to body 2 is v1-v2.
But as these velocity values are only relative to each other, they are therefore indeterminate as an absolute value and exclusive of any relationship to empty space (which is the universal absolute).
But within relativity theory, light emitted from body 1 or body 2 must be done so to conform with the universal law of light propagation at c in empty space as an absolute bench mark.
But to have this universal law of light propagation infers the relationship between light at c in empty space and the light emitted from the moving bodies at v must be known according to a universal law.
But a universal law requires universal relationships between empty space and the velocity of bodies
But the velocities of bodies are only relative to other bodies and never empty space and therefore never absolute.
Therefore the relationship of light emission velocity from a moving body and light propagation of light through empty space can never be determined within the theory of relativity.
Therefore relativity requires velocity of light emission from bodies to be unknown
Therefore relativity is based upon a property of light that must remain unknowable within its own postulates/axioms concerning the nature of light and motion.
But relativity assumes the propagation of light is always at c in relation to the empty space, thereby inferring an absolute relation of empty space to body motion and to light emission velocity.
Therefore relativity requires that light emission velocity from bodies is both unknowable and necessarily known.
As such relativity theory is self contradictory.

2. The light emitted from the body moving at v, is independent upon the velocity of the body.
This means light emission velocity from moving bodies follows a law that is both absolute in relation to empty space and relative in respect to the motion of bodies.
For when two bodies are in motion relative to empty space, then the emission velocities from the moving bodies are firstly known from the postulate of constancy of light at c in empty space.
Once this postulate is used, the emission velocity from the body is then determined.
For example, a body traveling at v, must have a light emission velocity of c-v in front of the moving body and c+v behind the moving body, so the light is then propagated at c through empty space.
Once this is done, then the light emission velocity from a moving body is known.
But in using this method, relativity requires a relationship of empty space, as the zero velocity bench mark and the relative velocity between bodies, that is unknowable in relation to the absolute of empty space.
Therefore, according to relativity theory, if the light emitted from the body moving at v, is independent upon the velocity of the body, then both the motion of the body and the light emission velocity are known as absolutes.
But relativity requires that body motion and therefore light emission velocity be only known as actions relative to other bodies.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 9

The same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
All frames of reference includes all relative and absolute reference frames
Yet relativity is only developed to include local clocks, local motions and therefore local reference frames.
Therefore relativity makes the claim that the theory can be applied in all reference frames, but develops the theory only in local reference frames.
Relativity is then formed upon the fallacy of one thought experiment in a local frame concludes to a universal law for all real reference frames.
Therefore relativity theory fallacious and therefore invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 10

The same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
This principle is based upon the inductive method and the findings of the experiments that failed to provide evidence for the motion of the earth.
But this assumes that the motion of the earth is real and therefore the earth is in an inertial reference frame that requires light to travel through local space at c.
Therefore, according to relativity, when the Michelson Morley experiment produced a null result, the velocity of light is always c.
But if light is always c on the moving earth, then it cannot be c relative to empty space, for the earth has a velocity of between 30-600km/s relative to empty space.
Therefore if light is propagated at c on earth, then it is propagated at c+30-600km/s relative to empty space.
But this light velocity contradicts the postulate that light always travels at c in empty space.
Therefore the relativistic understanding of light at c in all inertial frames requires a contradiction between light velocity around the earth and light velocity in empty space.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 11

The sagnac effect says light travels at c+-v relative to the earth frame when light is emitted from bodies that move at +-v relative to the earth frame.
But relativity says light will always propagate at c through space in all inertial frames.
The earth is an inertial frame
Therefore according to relativity, the sagnac effect should not exist in satellite transmissions.
But the sagnac effect does exist in satellite transmissions.
Therefore relativity theory, with its thought experiments is contradicted by experiment.
Therefore relativity theory is not a theory of science, but merely a theory of thought
But a theory of thought alone, used to describe the physical cannot be a real empirical theory
Therefore relativity is not a real empirical theory and must be abandoned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 12

The Michelson Morley and Michelson Gale experiments produced evidence that the fringe shift and light speed changed during the day and seasonally.
This means the speed of light has a universal cause as it is affected upon the earth
As the speed of light changes with a universal cause
Then the postulate that the light is propagated through space at c is false.
As the postulate is false then relativity theory is also false and relativity is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 13

Gamma is a variable used in equations to transform the length and time between relative motions, thereby maintaining the postulate of constant light velocity at c.
Gamma is developed through a thought experiment, whereby the equation of simultaneity is derived from a local action of light at c and moving clocks.
As gamma is used to shrink lengths between the clocks and dilate time travel between the clocks, then gamma is used, based upon the assumption that light is propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c.
But if light is propagated at a definite velocity c, then c must be defined, to be definite.
How then is the velocity of light defined within relativity theory?

If light velocity in empty space is defined only locally, then the velocity of light is not knowable relative to any absolute reference frame.
As such the absolute velocity of light at c, is not knowable in itself
But relativity assumes the velocity of light is knowable in itself as c.
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

If light velocity in empty space is defined only from an absolute, then the velocity of light is an absolute throughout the universe.
But to know the absolute light velocity, means man must have a means by which he can measure light velocity relative to a local absolute bench mark.
As the velocity of light is only ever measured in relation to the earth frame, then a defined velocity of light at c, relative to the earth frame means the earth is the absolute motionless reference frame.
But such a reference frame is not permitted in relativity
Therefore relativity does not have the means by which it can determine the “defined” and therefore absolute value of light at c.
As such relativity is logically invalidated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 14

The speed of light is constant in all inertial frames
Light speed is derived from a source in an inertial frame (1)
Light speed is then constant in an inertial frame (1) in which the light source is derived
But if there is another inertial frame, which does not have the same velocity as the light source, then light is constant to that inertial frame (2)
But for light speed to be constant in both inertial frames, then light must have two velocities, relative to the two inertial frames, to be constant in both inertial frames.
For this inertial frame (1) has v=0, then light has c=c in that frame.
But inertial frame (2) has v = v, then light has c=c+-v in that frame so light speed is at c.
But then light is both always at c in any inertial frame and not at c in every inertial frame in which that frame is not traveling at v=0.
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 15

If light is propagated in empty space at c
Then when a body moves relative to empty space
Then light acts on the body either at c+-v, or at c

If light acts on a body at c+-v, then this contradicts the postulate that the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
For the body velocity is known in relation to empty space, therefore light must be seen by the moving body, which (the light) moves in empty space at c.
But if light moves through empty space at c, then it must also move locally at c, in relation to the moving body.
But this means light must change from c to c+-v locally.
But such a transform is arbitrary and not found in the laws of electrodynamics and optics for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Therefore relativity contradicts its own postulates
Therefore relativity is invalid.

If light acts on a body at c, then light must be able to physically transform itself from c in empty space, to c+-v locally, to be seen locally to be traveling at c.
But such a transform is arbitrary and not found in the laws of electrodynamics and optics for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Therefore relativity contradicts its own postulates
Therefore relativity is invalid.

If light acts on a body at c+-v, or if light acts on a body at c, then relativity requires maths transforms to maintain constancy of light propagation at c in all inertial frames.
But such a maths transform means the theory projects outcomes into thought experiments before the thought experiment is constructed
Such projection through maths is the fallacy of begging of the question concerning the constancy of light propagation at c and the laws of electrodynamics and optics for which the equations of mechanics hold good.
As begging of the question is a logical fallacy contained within the theory
Then relativity is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 16

Relativity states, that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
But to have light propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c, means the empty space frame is a unique bench mark frame from which all other frames are related through the arbitrary property of light.
But a unique bench mark frame means the inertia of that frame must be known for the propagation of light at c to be known
But the unique reference frame of the empty space can only be known as an inertial frame when either compared to itself of other relative reference frames.
If the empty space frame is self referencing as an inertial frame, then relativity suffers from the logical fallacy of the vicious circle, thereby invalidating the theory.
If the empty space frame is known through reference to other relative motions and therefore other relative inertial frames, then the empty space is itself unknowable as a reference frame separate from any other reference frame.
But as all other reference frames are only relative inertial reference fames, and as relative reference frames are unknowable, due to the infinite relativity of all relative motions, then the inertia of empty space itself is unknowable within relativity.
But for the inertia of empty space to be unknowable, means the propagation of light at c in empty space is also an arbitrary truth claim linked into an unknowable.
Therefore as the inertia of empty space is unknowable, therefore the postulate “that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body” is an arbitrary postulate.
But an arbitrary postulate does not inform man concerning the nature of reality and light.
But relativity purports to describe the nature of reality and light.
Therefore relativity theory is both arbitrary and self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 17

Relativity combines the notions of absolute and relative within its model
Absolutes include the notion of an inertial frame, relative, light, light speed, time and number.
Yet relativity claims all actions within nature are known as relative to the observer in the inertial frame.
Therefore relativity claims a knowledge concerning the nature of light, inertia, time and number, which is excluded from any relative reference frame.
For to know the nature of light, inertia, time and number is an absolute, that can only be known by deduction above what is observed by any relative observer.
In short, the absolutes of light, inertia, time and number contradict the notion that these notions are only known within the theory as relatives.
Relativity is therefore self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 18

Relativity proposes a definition of time that is not a reflection of the real.
Relativity defines time as a proportion of one arbitrary clock rate to another clock rate known through the relative velocity of two clocks and the postulate of the constancy of light at c in empty space.
But to set a local clock requires knowledge of a uniform rate throughout the universe
But a uniform rate of time throughout the universe means time is absolute and uniform in rate
But a uniform time rate precludes the notion of time dilation.
Therefore to set the local clock, a uniform and universal rate is required, inferring an absolute time
Yet relativity theory says time is not absolute, but relative according to the relative velocity of the local clock, to that of another, arbitrary clock.
Therefore relativity requires time to be both absolute and relative.
Therefore relative is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 19

Relativity uses the notion of a local clock.
A local clock is never specified as a mechanical clock or merely a thought clock
If a mechanical clock is used in the thought experiment, then is physical properties are never specified.
As the physical properties are never specified in the thought experiment, then no empirical experiment can be used to test the notion of time dilation.
If a thought clock is used, then no physical experiment can be used to test the notion of time dilation.
Either way time dilation in physical clocks cannot be tested according to the theory of relativity
Therefore relativity theory is not relevant to any physical phenomena
Therefore relativity is not a theory of science but a thought myth.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
§ - 20

Relativity uses the notion of a local clock.
A local clock is said to have a tick rate
A rate must be linked into the other clock which is in same inertial frame
As the inertial frame is only known in reference to other, relative inertial frames, then the clock rate is then only relative to other inertial frames.
But as the local clock is in an inertial frame that is relative, then the inertial frame is not known in itself
But not to know the local inertial frame, means the local rate cannot be known in it self either
But not to know the local clock rate means the clocks can never be set
If the clocks can never be set then the thought experiment cannot ever come to anything more than an arbitrary conclusion concerning the nature of time dilation, length contraction and the propagation of light in empty space.
As relativity cannot establish and conclusions that are not arbitrary, then its conclusions are arbitrary and cannot measure the real
As the theory cannot measure the real, then it is not a theory of science.
As relativity is not a theory of science, then it must be abandoned.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 21

Relativity incorporates the notion of time dilation.
But dilation means to enlarge or to expand something
But relativity, time is merely a local quantity relative to another clock
As time is only a quantity, then any dilation of the quantity means the quantity is both itself and something else.
For example if a time of 5s dilates, then it enlarges to say 5.44s
But this means 5s is then both 5s and 5.44s
But number is number and cannot “expand” and therefore change.
But relativity requires time dilation and therefore number change for numbers to be both themselves and not themselves.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 22

Relativity incorporates the notion of time dilation.
But dilation means to enlarge or to expand something
But to enlarge or expand the quantity of time is only an analogy taken from the expansion of a physical thing.
But as relativity is based upon a thought experiment and not any physical clock
Then relativity requires the theory to be based upon a physical notion of time and a “thoughty”, maths notion of time.
This means relativity requires time to be both an abstract concept as placed into maths equations and analogously a physical thing to expand.
But an analogously physical thing is physical and not abstract
Therefore relativity theory requires a contradiction concerning the notion of time dilation as being both abstract and non abstract.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 23

Relativity theory is based upon a single thought experiment
Yet such a thought experiment can be reconfigured using other postulates and other phenomena that use light, light speed, reference frames and clocks.
As other thought experiments can produce other equations which are different to that of relativity, then the thought experiment of relativity cannot be used to verify any physical effect in the real without

1 - Assuming all other thought experiments are invalid
2 - Without begging the question concerning the validity of relativity thought experiment and then having its false notions such as length contraction and time dilation projected into the data
3 – Without having other thought experiments produce the same, similar or even better matches to the experimental data.

As such, relativity theory can never be used in the real without a logical fallacy being committed.
Therefore relativity theory is logically invalidated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 24

Relativity states the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Relativity states that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
A frame of reference includes all frames of reference
All frames of reference include all inertial frames
All inertial frames include empty space as an inertial frame
Therefore inertial frames have the same properties as empty space
Empty space is a frame in which the equations of mechanics hold good
Empty space is a frame at which light travels at c
Therefore the equations of mechanics hold good when light travels at c
Therefore light travels at c in all reference frames
But the equations of Newtonian mechanics hold good when empty space is Newton’s absolute space
Therefore light travel at c is absolute, relative to absolute space,
Therefore light travel at c is absolute, relative to relativity’s empty space.
As light travel at c is absolute in empty space, then light travel cannot change from c
As light cannot change from c relative to empty space, this means light cannot travel at c in any other reference frame other than empty space.
Therefore the equations of mechanics to not hold good in any frame other than empty space.
But this contradicts the statement that light travels at c in all reference frames.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 25

Relativity states the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
But the laws of electrodynamics include Maxwell’s equations
Maxwell’s equations distinguish between magnet movement and conductor movement relative to the ether (and therefore the earth).
But relativity denies any maths distinction between these two movments
Therefore the above relativity postulate contradicts the equations of mechanics that hold good.
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 26

Relativity states that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
But relativity does not define what empty space is
As empty space is then arbitrary then so to is the claim that light travels at c in empty space
As the postulate contains an arbitrary claim, then any conclusions in relativity theory are arbitrary
But an arbitrary conclusion is not science
Therefore relativity theory is not science.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 27

Relativity states the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Relativity states that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
Relativity assumes light is caused by an emitting body
But optics says light can exist without a source and therefore without a body.
Therefore relativity contradicts the laws of optics
Therefore relativity is self contradictory

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 28

Relativity states the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Relativity states that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
Relativity says the equations of mechanics hold good when the length of a rod L remains L, where it says “In accordance with the principle of relativity the length to be discovered by the operation (a)—we will call it “the length of the rod in the moving system”—must be equal to the length l of the stationary rod.”
Relativity says the length of the rod of L does not remain L, where it says “the length of the (moving) rod in the stationary system.” This we shall determine on the basis of our two principles, and we shall find that it differs from l.”
Therefore relativity says the length of the rod is L and L to have the equations of mechanics hold good and not L, to have light propagated in empty space at c.
Therefore in relativity, the rod length is both L and not L
Therefore relativity is self contradictory

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 29

Relativity states the same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
Relativity states that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
The thought experiment used to derive the equation of simultaneity includes the use of clocks, rods and light propagation at c
But relativity says light is propagated in empty space at c
As the equation of simultaneity includes physical things in space, then space is not empty
Therefore relativity derives an equation with light at c, based upon both empty and non empty space.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 30

The same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good
All frames of reference includes the reference frame of the divine being, who sees all
As relativity claims its theory accounts for all reference frames, then it claims to account for Gods knowledge of all events in the universe as just another reference frame
But to have the same knowledge as God means the theory of relativity participates in the divine mind
Therefore, relativity concludes to Einstein as being either a prophet who was informed by God, or Einstein was God.
But Einstein was neither a prophet of God
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 31

If Newtonian equations hold good, then space is the absolute reference frame.
Yet according to relativity, same laws of electrodynamics and optics will be valid for all frames of reference for which the equations of mechanics hold good.
But to have the notion of all reference frames means all reference frames are ultimately referred back to the Newtonian notion of the absolute space as the bench mark reference frame.
Therefore relativity has no truly relative or local reference frames if Newtonian mechanics holds good
But relativity denies an absolute reference frame.
Therefore relativity is inconsistent with its own principles and therefore invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 32

If there is no absolutely stationary space, then all inertial frames are relative
If all inertial frames are relative, then the velocity and acceleration of any inertial frame is not known relative to any absolute
What is not know relative to any absolute is only known relative to a relative
But what is know relative to a relative is only know through another relative an so on, ad infinitum
What is known only ad infinitum, cannot be known, for knowledge is always delayed
Therefore according to the theory of relativity, no velocity or acceleration can be known in itself, therefore every velocity and every acceleration in relativity theory is completely arbitrary
But what is completely arbitrary does not follow any laws.
But relativity claims that light and physical phenomena follow laws
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 33

Relativity requires light propagation in empty space at c
Yet the universe never contains empty space
For the universe is filled with “ethereal” properties to allow it to bend light, cause gravity and transfer physical information throughout the universe
Therefore the postulate of light travel at c in empty space is not applicable to the universe
Therefore relativity is not a science theory concerned with the real

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 34

Relativity uses Newtonian mechanics as its foundation, whereby the equations of mechanics hold good.
But Newtonian mechanics uses the Cartesian coordinate system of x,y,z and a separate absolute time.
But relativity uses a space time continuum of x,y,z,t, which is not the Cartesian coordinate system of Newtonian mechanics
Therefore relativity requires the Cartesian coordinate system with absolute time, but also rejects the same coordinate system with its novel x,y,z,t system.
Therefore relativity contradicts itself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 35

Relativity postulates light at c in empty space and the equations of mechanics holds good
Relativity derives equations for length contraction and time dilation as maths transforms from one frame to another frame as conclusions of these postulates.
Relativity requires the use of maths transforms within its own model of physical reality
Therefore if an experiment is conducted to test for light at c in empty space, length contraction and time dilation, then any result can be modified to conform to these results.
Therefore if an experiment produces light speed >c or <c, then the appropriate length contraction and time dilation may then be applied to ensure the data is interpreted within the relativity model to have light speed =c.
But this process only serves to produce the required outcomes as determined by relativity theory and its thought experiment.
As such, any experiment set up to determine light speed, length contraction or time dilation falls into the fallacy of question begging to make the data mean what relativity says it must mean.
As such relativity theory is not testable in the real
But a theory that is not testable in the real is not a valid theory of science
Therefore relativity is not a valid theory of science.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 36

Relativity says its theory is founded on the postulate that the equations of mechanics hold good
Yet not all equations of mechanics existed at the time relativity theory was developed
In fact modern relativity theory is at odds with equations of mechanical theory
Further, the future research may produce more equations that are not compatible with relativity theory
Therefore the postulate that equations of mechanics hold good is merely a historical claim that changes with time
But a theory of science cannot not be dependent upon with ever changing equations of mechanics and remain consistent with equations of mechanics
Therefore relativity is and is not founded upon the postulate that the equations of mechanics hold good
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 37

Relativity theory is founded on the postulate that the equations of mechanics hold good
But the equations of mechanics hold good assumes the equations of mechanics are always the same
But if the equations of mechanics are always the same then mechanics must be described by a united set of mechanical theories
But as there is not united set of mechanical theories, then these contrary and contradictory theories will produce contrary and contradictory mechanical equations.
But a theory cannot be based upon contrary and contradictory mechanical equations.
For contrary and contradictory mechanical equations, produce contrary and contradictory postulates.
Therefore relativity is based upon contrary and contradictory mechanical equations.
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 38

Relativity says its theory is founded on the postulate that the equations of mechanics hold good
But relativity is concerned with deriving equations of mechanics
Therefore relativity theory is self referencing
What is self referencing is a vicious circle
Therefore relativity theory is invalid through the fallacy of a vicious circle.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 39

Relativity is based upon the need to have a common time between events A and B
Relativity states the only way to have common time is through the use of light speed, distance and clocks with its two postulates
But common time is merely an artificial construct created by relativity theory which does not posit other means to attain a common time.
As other means to determine common time are not investigated within the theory, relativity suffers from the a truncated understanding of what time is and how common time can be measured
As common time can be measured in more than one valid way, then any equation derived in relativity, is merely an equation based upon its own truncated understanding of time
Such a set of equations cannot be known as a reflection of the real, for other and perhaps better equations can be used for the same purpose
As such, relativity suffers from a truncated and therefore false understanding of what time and common time are.
As such relativity theory is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 40

Relativity says common time is determined within its own postulates and its own maths definition as local and transitory quantity
But philosophy, which explains the real through observation and reason defines time without maths a part of the real that is universal and absolute.
Therefore, when relativity defines time, simultaneity and time dilation in mathematical terms, it does so at odds with the definition found in philosophy.
As philosophy obtains to the nature of things, then any conclusion in another science opposing the conclusions of philosophy makes that conclusion invalid
Relativity arrives at conclusions in opposition to philosophy
Therefore relativity must be invalid

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 41

Relativity defines time from a thought clock
As the thought clock is never identified within the theory as a real clock
Then the theory does not specify a clock to be used to verify the theory
As a clock is not specified, then any clock can be used to verify the theory
But if any clock can be used, then any clock rate can be used
But if any clock rate can be used, then any random clock rate can be used
But any random clock rate cannot be used in the real to determine light speed, for light speed is assumed to be c

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 42

Relativity says local time is determined by a clock rate
The clock rate is only mathematically linked into the velocity of a moving system and light speed.
However, the clock rate is never physically linked to the velocity of the clock and light speed
But as all clocks are physical in the real, then relativity can never be tested for time dilation in the real.
Therefore relativity theory is not a theory of physical things
Therefore relativity theory is not a theory of science.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 43

Relativity says that light is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body.
When deriving the formula for time synchronization of a moving rod, relativity proposes the following formula as part of its argument tB-tA = rAB/(c-v) and t’A-tB = rAB/(c+v)
But this means time synchronization is derived assuming time is determined with c+-v.
But c+-v contradicts the postulate of light speed at c in empty space and thus in the thought experiment
As such relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 44

Relativity proposes a “the length of the rod in the moving system”
But the moving system is only known in relation to the stationary system
But the stationary system is without any reference to a local system
Therefore if the stationary system is to relate to the real then the stationary system must be stationary, not locally, but in relation to the universe
But to have a stationary system in relation to the universe is to have a real system within the universe with an absolute motion of zero
But relativity does not permit absolute motions of zero.
As such relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 45

Relativity theory was developed at a time when all observation were made from the earth.
Relativity assumes a stationary system to derive its formulas of time dilation and length contraction
Relativity must assign a stationary system relative to all other motions, otherwise the system is not stationary.
But to be stationary relative to all other motions means the system is absolutely stationary
Therefore, for relativity to work in the real, the theory must assume a stationary system that is known locally and is stationary relative to the rest of the universe.
As is was assumed that the earth orbited the sun, then there is no local stationary system
Therefore relativity cannot be applied to any real situation if the earth is moving
But relativity was derived, based upon the assumption of a moving earth and the constancy of light in a moving inertial frame.
Therefore such relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 46

Relativity theory was developed at a time when all observation were made from the earth.
Relativity assumes a stationary system to derive its formulas of time dilation and length contraction
Relativity must assign a stationary system relative to all other motions, otherwise the system is not stationary.
But to be stationary relative to all other motions means the system is absolutely stationary
Therefore, for relativity to work in the real, the theory must assume a stationary system that is known locally and is stationary relative to the rest of the universe.
Only geocentrism or geostatism affirms an absolutely stationary earth.
Therefore, for relativity to work in the real, the theory must affirm geocentrism, or geostatism.
But relativity was derived, based upon the assumption of a moving earth and the constancy of light in a moving inertial frame.
Therefore such relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 47

Relativity states “The distance between these two points, measured by the measuring-rod already employed, which in this case is at rest, is also a length which may be designated “the length of the rod.”
But the length of the rod at rest, must be at rest in relation to the universe, otherwise the rod is not at rest.
But this means a rod length can only be determined with an absolutely stationary rest frame
But relativity denies such a frame exists
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 48

Relativity states “the length of the rod in the moving system” and “the length of the (moving) rod in the stationary system.”
The terms “moving system” and “stationary system” are terms referred to absolute rest frame as shown above.
But relativity denies such a frame exists
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 49

Relativity states “we cannot attach any absolute signification to the concept of simultaneity, but that two events which, viewed from a system of co-ordinates, are simultaneous, can no longer be looked upon as simultaneous events when envisaged from a system which is in motion relatively to that system.”
This confuses the notion of time as numbered movement as measured by clocks with duration as a continued existence
As the duration of the events are the same, for the continued existence of the two systems is the same, then the stationary and moving frames must produce times that measure duration which are the same.
However the stationary and moving frames may produce times that are different possibly due to the speed of light and the speed of the clocks.
Even so, if the times as measured by the clocks are different, the duration of the events is the same
As the duration is a continued existence, which is a measure of any thing that exists, then the rod with length L must also continue to exist in the same duration, regardless of stationary or moving reference frames.
Therefore even though relativity concludes to a length reduction in the rod due to relative motion, rod length contraction is not possible, for the rod duration does not change.
Therefore relativity is invalid due to its confusion over time length and duration.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 50

Relativity is based upon a fixed coordinate system of x,y,z,t, where x,y,z is a fixed continuum of coordinate points
The fixed coordinate system is assumed in the derivation of time synchronization, length contraction and time dilation.
The standard model says the universe is expanding in all directions, whereby x,y,z is no longer fixed, but every increasing
But for the real universe to be ever increasing, then the coordinate system cannot be fixed
Therefore relativity is based upon a false understanding of the nature of the universe as proposed by the standard model
But the standard model is the mainstream physics
But relativity is also the mainstream physics
Therefore relativity contradicts the standard model
Therefore, according to the mainstream physics, relativity theory is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 51

Relativity theory assumes space is homogenous
But quantized red shift of galaxies shows the universe is composed of galaxies that are uniformly placed around the earth in concentric spheres
Therefore relativity theory is based upon an assumption not found in the real
Therefore relativity is not a reflection of the real
Therefore relativity theory is invalidated.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 52

Relativity theory proposes a “Physical Meaning of the Equations Obtained in Respect to Moving Rigid Bodies and Moving Clocks”
The equations used propose the shape of a moving sphere changes shape when viewed from a stationary reference frame.
The physical meaning of relativity is then nothing more than an optical illusion created by postulates.
But these postulates are self contradictory
Therefore the appearance of length shrinkage is also self contradictory
Therefore the appearance of length contraction does not occur as relativity proposes
Therefore relativity is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 § - 53

Relativity theory concludes time marked by the moving clock as seen by the stationary clock reduces time by 1/2v^2/c^2 per second.
But this means that time in the moving frame as seen from the stationary frame is changed due to postulates are self contradictory
Therefore the appearance of time change is also self contradictory
Therefore the appearance of time change does not occur as relativity proposes
Therefore relativity is invalid.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 54

Relativity requires an absolute stationary frame (as shown above)
In the absolutely stationary frame, the clock time is set
The clock time in the absolute frame is a rate that is then absolute
What is absolute is absolute throughout the universe
Therefore clock rate is set as an absolute throughout the universe
But relativity concludes that time is not absolute throughout the universe, but only relative to a relative stationary frame
Therefore relativity is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 55

Relativity theory proposes the equations of mechanics hold good in all reference frames.
This means that if the earth is moving through space, then stellar light aberration is caused by the earth
Yet if the earth is stationary, then stellar aberration is caused by a changing motion of light through space
As George Airy’s water filled telescope experiment produced a null result, then stellar aberration is not accounted for through a moving earth.
Therefore stellar aberration is caused by the motion of light over the year
But the motion of light over the year changes
Therefore the universe is not homogenous as assumed by relativity theory.
Therefore experiment invalidates relativity theory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 56

As George Airy’s water filled telescope experiment produced a null result, then stellar aberration is not accounted for through a moving earth.
Therefore stellar aberration is caused by the motion of light over the year
But motion of light in space means space must have properties to move light
But space with properties is not the empty space of relativity theory
Therefore George Airy’s water filled telescope experiment invalidates relativity.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 57

Special relativity requires an empty space
General relativity requires space have properties
As special and general relativity, are both parts of relativity theory
Then because relativity theory requires space to be both empty and therefore without properties and with properties
Therefore relativity theory is self contradictory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

§ - 58

Relativity claims gravity is caused by a bending of space-time
Planets orbit in ellipses
But an elliptical orbit means the bending of space-time must be non uniform around a body and the non uniformity of the bending must change over time as the shape of the planets orbit changes.
But relativity does not include any mechanism to have the non uniform bending of space-time around a body that changes with time as the planets orbital direction changes.
Therefore relativity does not account for elliptical orbits
Therefore relativity is invalidated

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Invalidation 46 is a rather revealing demonstration that even when Albert Einstein designed his theory, he could not avoid geocentrism as being the only reference frame in which his theory, or at least a modified form of his theory that doesn’t have any logical problems, can possibly work.

As such I pose as a possible partial answer to the problem posed by relativists who claim the apparent success of relativity theory. If it has had any real success, or any mathematical success, it is because the fundamental equations derived in the 1905 paper assume a stationary earth. As such any claims of success for relativity can be understood as evidence for a stationary earth.

JM

1 comment:

  1. I think the medium for electromagnetic waves is electrons. It seems to fit most experiments though not sure there really is enough stuff in the vacuum for this idea. Looking at this on http://electronwaves.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete