Natural Science Forum / Physics / Particle Physics / February 2006

"General Relativity Examined"

    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:
    Dimensional Entity--------------Value
    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:

    Dimensional Entity------------Value
    Force (F)----------------------1
    Length (L)--------------------1
    Time (T)-----------------------1/(1+$)
    Space (S)----------------------1/(1+$)

Where "$" is the gravitational potential between two
elevations as defined with the upper elevation units of measurement for
energy.
(The value of "$" is identical with the equivalent term in the time dilation
provided by GTR.) 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 in "Gravity" [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 energy and does not contain a 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:

    Dimensional Entity-------------------Value
    Force (F)----------------------------1
    Length (L)---------------------------1/(1-$)
    Time (T)-----------------------------(1-$)

    It should be noted that the above could be 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.

    As a result of failing to solve his difficulty in terms of
Euclidean space because of his error in the use of Tensor Calculus, it would
seem possible that he solved his dilemma by "faking it", either
intentionally or
in ignorance, by resorting to the artificiality of non-Euclidean geometry.
He
certainly would know that the gravitational fields available in the Solar
System
were too weak to reveal the effects of any 2nd order error. (It has been
reported that Dr. Einstein was extremely uneasy at the extension of GTR to
extremely strong fields, and at a conference where GTR was debated, the
conclusion reached was "why shouldn't we consider space to be curved, no one
can
prove it isn't". Actually they can and the proof is easy.)

    There are at least two lessons here. One lesson is Dr.
Einstein's warning that "one should rely on observation and reasoning and
not be
swayed by the unproven opinions of others no matter how numerous or renowned
they may be". (This also applies to Dr. Einstein's conclusions). The second
lesson is that, while mathematics is a very useful tool, but it is only a
tool
and has its own limitations. A major limitation is that the probability of
error
increases as the number of steps involved become larger and quite often the
existence of such an error is not revealed by the results. Another
limitation is
that there are processes that can be described mathematically but which
cannot
work in reality unless an additional mechanization not considered in the
mathematics is present. (An example is the calculation of the output of a
vacuum
tube using its property of transconductance. The mathematics shows that
applying
a negative voltage to the control grid produces an increase in its positive
plate current. The mathematics does not show that this cannot occur unless
there
is a bias plate current already flowing and that the apparent increase in
plate
current results from a reduction in the flow of the bias current electrons.)

    Mathematics should never be used without the an intelligent
understanding of the mechanisms involved, as was the practice prior to Dr.
Einstein's work. (In the case of GTR, one of the errors was the fact that
the
definition of a straight line currently in use is inadequate even for
Euclidean
geometry. A straight line is more properly defined as the shortest distance
between two points WHICH REMAINS WITHIN THE GEOMETRY IN QUESTION. This
additional requirement is automatically met in Euclidean Geometry, but, in
the
case of non-Euclidean geometry, the shortest distance between two points
does
not meet that definition. In the two dimensional non-Euclidean geometry
represented by the Earth's surface, the shortest distance between New York
and
Los Angeles is not a great circle as we have been taught, it is through a
tunnel
which passes about 200 miles below the Mississippi river.)

    For decades, it has been recognized that GTR and the related
concept of "space-time" of STR conflicted with Quantum Theory. Experimental
results indicate that Quantum Theory is valid to an extreme degree of
accuracy,
but, for some reason, no one seems to have questioned the validity of GTR.
To
resolve the dilemma Superstring Theory has been developed which asserts that
space is actually 10 dimensional and that the excess dimensions were in the
form
of loops having a conveniently unobservable diameter of 10^-34 meters. It
must
be pointed out that any jackass can solve a problem by adding an otherwise
unnecessary degree(s) of freedom.

    The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity"
{1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH
EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT
ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.

    All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.

    Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.

    E-mail:- einsteinhoax@isp.com

    The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.