Abouzar Bahari

For us it is a real physical change orelse the relativity is useless completely. However, we use it in our satellites, airplanes, or others today. Please do not scape from the reality. The ZPF (vacuum/ Ether) is the absolute frame. So, this is a crazy forum. Mainstream physics is not what you and other persons like you try to expand it.

Yes, true. In our frame (stationary frame (S)), the muons' life is extended. That is, we say, a real physical change. Hence, the clock of a high-speed rocket is really dilated, as in the Hafele-Kitting experiment for an airplane. However, the clock on the earth is not dilated for the S' observer on the rocket (contrary to what SR says). All of these formulas are not related to this problem at all. not related to this problem. I have explained to others what reality means to us. Please see my explanation. Why did you not answer my question?

Twin Paradox is not a hypothetical test. As I mentioned, you can do it with your twin. In the end, you will see him. One of the clocks must be dilated during the long constant-speed stage of this journey because of Lorentz transformations. The paradox is which one is dilated. Please answer this question. You will say the moving one's clock is dilated and when I ask you again why this one is dilated, you will say because this one experiences acceleration at the start and deceleration at the end. However, this answer is wrong, since the much longer stage of constant-speed is much more important for time dilation. So, what is the "real change"? for us as the observer, the fast muon are more extended of their age. This is a real and physical change in our world that we can see. Exactly when we see the real changes in the materials in High gravitational fields.

Wrong statement. The Lorentz transformations are real changes to the materials and clocks. The extended half-life of fast-moving muons proves time dilation in reality (not relative) to the moving objects. The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four caesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks in motion to stationary clocks at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity. Hence, the Lorentz transformations are actual changes that happen to the moving objects. Although the atomic clock inside the moving high-speed airplane is dilated with the gamma factor, the stationary atomic clock on the earth is not dilated. The researchers test the Lorentz formulas for the moving frames and get results for the Lorenz invariance of the inertial frames. However, they have ignored to test the Lorentz formulas from the view of the moving observer who thinks he is at rest according to what the SR says. Therefore, what they actually achieved is the Lorentz invariance not the symmetry of the inertial frames. Why you split this conversation from the Twin paradox subject? Let the others see our debate and they can tell their ideas. What I have told is not related to the GR formulas, except that Einestein himself, first ignored Ether when he presented SR, but later, when he presented GR, he accepted it: Einstein himself accepted the Ether to some extent after his theory of General Relativity (GR). He wrote (1920): “We may say that according to the general theory of relativity, space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists Ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without Ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. However, this Ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts, which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it”

In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR. In the time of Einstein, the vacuum was taught to be nothing or fill nothing. Today, we know that there is a quantum field inside the vacuum: Zero-point field/ Higgs field or the past-term: Ether. However, in SR, it is just mentioned that we can ignore the Ether since there is no influence from that. Today, from the Casimir effect and Lamb shift or others, we know it can affect the materials. Therefore, a moving body inside this medium is not symmetrical with the stationary one inside it. Let me elaborate more about that: SR does not explain why the physical properties of the moving bodies are transformed In SR, the S observer thinks the length of the moving body (S’) is contracted, its time is dilated and its mass is increased with the Lorentz factor. The S’ observer thinks the same about the S body. Hence, in the SR aspect, everything is relative. However, if these physical changes are real as demonstrated by the tests in accelerators, in airplanes or etc, the question is why these physical changes must occur for a moving body. SR has no answer to this question. In this theory, at higher velocities, change in length, mass, and time of the moving body happens without a reasonable cause. The main problem is that if the motion is the only reason for the slower working of a moving clock or contracting the length of the moving body, this is a breach of the mass-energy conservation law, because, no energy is applied to dilate the moving clock, and contract the body’s length. Einstein wrote in his book (1920): “A body moving with the velocity 𝑣, which absorbs an amount of energy E0 in the form of radiation without suffering an alteration in velocity in the process, has, as a consequence, its energy increased by an amount γE0“. With no doubt, it is obvious that in this statement, the “mass-energy conservation law” is breached, unless an external factor from the vacuum causes a rise in the internal energy of the body from E0 to γE0. Furthermore, as we know, from general relativity (GR), the clocks are dilated and the length are contracted whenever they are located in a gravitational field. In fact, in GR, there is a physical reason for these changes: The gravitational energy works to make the clocks, slowed down and to contract the length. In a gravitational field, the biological activities of the organisms are dilated as well. Nevertheless, there is no physical reason for such transformations in the SR.

You and others like you are ignoring the most important stage of this paradox: the constant-velocity stage. This stage is completely symmetrical as SR says. This is a real test not hypothetical and you can do it with your twin. Just adjust your clock. One of you takes a rocket and the other places on the earth. Both of you think that during the constant-velocity stage of the rocket, the clock of the others is dilated and it is a real contradiction plus many other contradictions in SR. That is because the two inertial frames are not symmetrical as SR says. in reality, because of the quantum fields inside the vacuum (ZPF or Higgs field), the inertial frame, stationary inside the quantum field is not the same as the moving frame inside this field. In fact, only the moving one experiences the Lorentz transformations.

Twin and Ladder paradoxes are real contradictions. Some scientists believe the twin paradox can be resolved within the standard framework of SR: the traveling twin's trajectory involves two different inertial frames, one for the outbound journey and one for the inbound journey. Some of them suggest that the twin on the rocket is undergoing acceleration, which makes him a non-inertial observer. In both views, they think there is no symmetry between the space-time paths of the twins. Therefore, they reject this as a real logical contradiction. These ideas tried to reject the twin paradox as they convert it to a non-symmetrical system, but they intermittently neglect the symmetry between the twin’s frames for the constant-velocity stage of the rocket motion, being a much longer stage in this travel. From one of the brother’s view, the other one’s clock must be dilated in the constant-velocity stage of the rocket and when the traveling brother comes back, either of these twins believes the other one is younger. Therefore, this is a real contradiction in SR. The Ladder paradox is absolutely similar to the Twin paradox and comes from the symmetry of the inertial frames as the SR argues.

Hello. Use the following link to know more about Prof. Harold E. (Hal) Puthoff: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Harold-Puthoff https://spacecomexpo.com/archive/harold-puthoff/ https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/puthoff-harold-e-1936 You are supposed to regard justice for everyone. They started to humiliate and insult me. I had to answer their impoliteness and bad-tempered behavior. YOU ALSO TRY TO SPEAK RUDELY BY SAYING "YOUR THIN SKIN". This is wrong. Again, you also try to humiliate others. Do not such unscientific behavior. If you read my paper, I have made it clear that the inertial frame, which is moving in relation to the ZPF, is tolerating the Lorentz transformations and the inertial frame which is at rest, in relation to the ZPF, is not supposed to be transformed by Lorentz equations. My BS. is Mining Engineering, M.S. is Petroleum Engineering and PhD is Nuclear Physics. I am also studying Ms. in Genetics (Biology). I have several researches about advanced mathematical methods like Genetic algorithm, Phase logic, Monte Carlo methods, advanced optimizations (like Trust-region), Neural Networks and etc. in Petroleum Engineering and Nuclear physics (for those people who said to me that you do not know the arithmetic signs and they recommend me to work on mathematics 😂). However, as I said, I have worked on SR and GR much more than the other researches (about 1/4 of my life).

Are you thinking I am crazy? As a moderator,you are supposed to regard justice, not to side a person/ group of persons. Their behavior was insult and humiliation, evidently (with no doubt). In addition, my paper has been verified already by very famous scientists like Prof. Hal Puthoff. You and the other people here are not in a position to verify my paper and comments. Nonsense, For sure.

You and others already have gotten your answers, scientifically. Try not to convince me by definitely WRONG statements. Λ-1(v)=Λ(-v) does not mean that two equations are symmetrical. For instance, 1/x is x-1, but it is not the symmetry of x or -x. Symmetry of signs means: x=x or x=-x. So, stop your false words. I am a nuclear physicist and work a lot with "parity" and such kind of terms in particle physics. So, please do not explain for me. I can not continue this discussion with you more, since you did not regard politeness in a scientific discussion. Please stop answering me. This is my post and I can hear from you anymore. Thanks.

Mr, moderator, is not "As to you, you are nowhere near the world of science" an insult or humiliation from your point of view????? if it is not, I have no other word with you nor this forum again. Crazy persons, think other are crazy. So, shut up. Or this one: "No wonder you can't handle a sign inversion. "

shut your mouth and stop humiliation. I think you even not literate in the kindergarten level. reported as well. Unfortunately, when I discussed and rejects their math and physics by strong math/physical logic and made them empty of any objection, they had to try humiliate and insult me. This behavior belongs to people who are not scientific, not literate and civilized. I have reported them. Please follow up this matter. Regards. False statement. Go and read what I wrote to you again.

I did not put c=1. others who were discussing with me did it, and I replied to them.

span widget When the S is stationary and S’ is moving, what you are saying is that the term x'=(x-vt) in the Lorentz formula is in the Galilean-Newtonian mechanics and does not relate to SR. OK, this is true. In Newtonian mechanics, when we use the negative quantities for v, you will use x'=(x+vt), instead. Example: x= 10 m t= 2 s v (S’ velocity) = 3 m/s x'=(x-vt)= 10-(3)(2)=4 m For v= -3 m/s --> x'=(x+vt)=10+(3)(2)=16 m However, in Lorentz transformations, we are not going to use x'=γ (x+vt) and t'=γ(t+vx/c2) in the case that S’ is moving with the speed v to the left (for instance v = -108 m/s) and in any papers, texts, books, etc about the SR, nobody use such terms for Lorentz equations, in the case that S’ is moving to the left. Not Lorentz, nor Einstein, nor any other people. All the times, everybody use the main formulas, whether the S’ frame is moving to the right or to the left. Have you asked of yourself, why? That is because the Lorentz formulations have been invented to consider the light speed to be constant to c when it is propagated spherically for both S and S’ frame: metrics invariance for both S and S’. Before I make an example, I will derive the Lorentz equations when a light signal is propagated spherically : 𝑥 2 + 𝑦 2 + 𝑧 2 − 𝑐 2 𝑡2 = 𝑥 ′2 + 𝑦 ′2 + 𝑧 ′2 − 𝑐 2 𝑡 ′2 = 0 --> x=ct , x'=ct' x'=γ (x-vt) --> ct'=γ (ct-vt) x=γ (x'+vt' ) --> ct=γ (ct'+vt') 𝑦 = 𝑦’ 𝑧 = 𝑧’ t=γt' (1+v/c) t'=γt (1-v/c) t'=γ^2 t' (1-v/c)(1+v/c) γ=1/√(1-v2/c2 ) For instance, suppose the S frame is stationary and the S’ frame is moving to the left with a constant velocity v = 108 m/s. When the center of coordinates (zero point) of these frames is coincided with together, a light signal is propagated from this point spherically (suppose in the figure 1, S' is moving to the left instead of moving to the right). At this moment, the clocks of both S and S’ observers which have already adjusted together, start to work. We want to calculate the light coordinate in both S and S’ frames after 2 ms. In the S frame: t=2 ms x=ct=3×108×2×10-3=6×105 m =600 km In the S’ frame: with employing the Lorentz transformations, we obtain: x'=γ (x-vt)=1.06 (600-108×2×10-3)=424 km t'=γ(t-vx/c2 )=1.41 s Graphically, you can find that the quantities we have achieved with these formulas for the light signal coordinate for S’ is not true quantities for positive axes of x’. However, since the light is propagated spherically, for negative axes of x’, it becomes true. I mean when the x=ct=-600 km --> x'=-424 km Therefore, we can neglect the sign of x and v in Lorentz transformations and always use the main formulas, whether S’ is moving to the right or left. But if you persist to use x'=γ (x+vt), when the S’ is going to the left, it is OK. However, when you reverse the formula to x=γ (x'-vt'), you must not to apply v reversal, as Dr. Rindler says, to make them symmetrical. If so, you would find γ=1/(1+v/c) which is less than 1 and so, your length would be elongated and time becomes faster. Now, you can go and find something funnier. First, the light speed is a universal constant c = 3*108 m/s. It is not equals to 1. So, when you use the c in the equations, if you want to simplify your mathematical equations, you can use c=1 instead. However, when you want it as a physical constant paprameter, you are not allowed to use c=1. For instance, in the Lorentz equations β= v/c is a number between 0 to 1. But if you put c=1, β= v/c is a number equals to v which could be much larger than 1. Therefore, it is wrong to use c=1 in the Lorentz formulas. Second, as a physicist, you are supposed to simplify the equations not to make them more complicated by copy and paste other derivations of them for electrons inside the magnetic fields and we have from the Internet. Yes, absolutely there are other derivations of the Lorentz transformations in 4 dimensions. But, I am using the simple and completely applicable original Lorentz equations only for x direction, intentionally to explain why these equations are not symmetrical: You have the equation x'=γ (x-vt), when you reverse it, you will find x=γ (x'+vt) , these two equations are not the same, so they are not symmetrical. You have the equation t'=γ(t-vx/c2 ), when you reverse it you will find t=γ(t'+(vx')/c2), these two equations are not the same, so they are not symmetrical. We are not allowed to change the v sign, when we reverse the equation. Because we are performing just an arithmetic job, not changing the observer. Third, after a PhD in nuclear physics and Ms. And Bs. In engineering and writing many outstanding papers that published in the ISI journals and teaching several years in the university and 10 years of hard studying about the SR (at least 200 papers and 20 books) and deep thinking and learning, yes I can not understand the bullshits you add to my comments like "Λ(−v)Λ(v)A=IA means the symmetry of two equations" or γ' or other wrong statements of yours. But, what I understand is that I am talking to some young boys who ever in BS or lesser period and try to discuss with others without even study and learn their papers. This is crazy. I taught I am discussing with some literate people not some dogmatic people who try to speak fast and loudly without even studying and hearing the words of the person in front of them. If I knew, I did not discuss with you never. · Please search in the internet and find the symmetry means. If you can prove that Λ(−v)Λ(v)A=IA means the symmetry of two equations, I will accept your words, or else, please shut your mouth and first, study, then talk. · My attempt is not anti-relativity completely. I have accepted the invariant of the Lorentz equations, but, I do not agree with that they are symmetrical. · All the experimental tests agree with the above-mentioned claims. For instance, the atomic clock inside the moving high-speed airplane is dilated with the gamma factor, but the stationary atomic clock on the earth is not dilated. The researchers test the Lorentz formulas for the moving frames and get results for the Lorenz invariance of the inertial frames. However, they have ignored to test the Lorentz formulas from the view of the moving observer who thinks he is at rest according to what the SR says. Therefore, what they actually achieved is the Lorentz invariance not the symmetry of the inertial frames. · My paper after 5 month from its publication by a refereed journal was taken into account much more than I expected. In your forum, you mentors do not allow the others to speak. You just want to speak what you have learnt already in your books. But the real researchers are open- minded persons who do not think that all the matters in the books are true. They are finding the false theories. Just search how many famous scientists are completely or partially against relativity (you can find it in my paper). · About what you said I do not want to understand the negative value in the equation, read my answers to other. · But, whenever, some dogmatic people are dominant on the world of science, they could not be successful to talk and make their theories worldwide spreading. I do not want to say the journals should publish bullshits. But, I want to say the new theories if they are elaborated scientifically, must be published. Recently a published research showed that the velocity of the progress of science decreased rapidly in recent years. The reason is exactly those dogmatic people in the world of science today. Unfortunately, the people like you, when they have not enough logic in their hands (mathematical or physical logic), try to humiliate the person against them. That is the method of not literate and not civilized persons and I am so familiar with such people. I again recommend you to study more and then come and discuss with honorable people. Just search my name then open your mouth and say bullshits.

Do not claim. Prove it, if you can Mr. mathematician. I knew this, but please note that c is a physical parameter, and is not a mathematical one. So, it can be lessen to 1 in mathematical formulas or Minkowski space-time, metrics, etc, but it should not be ignored or lessen to 1, when we discuss about physics or physical parameters.

In mathematics, this term you mentioned : Λ(v)Λ(−v)=ΛΛ−1=I does not mean that Λ is symmetrical. For instance, [1/8] is the reverse of [8] in 1D matrix and [1/8].[8]= I. But 1/8 is not symmetrical with 8. Λ is symmetrical when Λ(v)= Λ(−v), which is not in Lorentz equations. See the term "Parity" in physics. In 1 dimension: 𝑥′ = 𝛾(𝑥 - 𝑣𝑡) but the reverse equation is 𝑥 = 𝛾(𝑥' +𝑣𝑡′). They are not equal to each other. Therefore, they are not symmetrical. we can not change the sign of v, when we reverse the equation. Why? Because it is not a vector. It is a scalar parameter. Even if you consider it as a vector, its sign in both of above-mentioned equation remains +v because we defined it as the velocity of S’ direction to the S direction which is to the right (+). it must be mention that we are talking about physical parameters like velocity and it must be a scalar or vector. they are not just mathematics. Your proof is completely wrong, as the others made this mistake. I have provided an easy and understandable of asymmetry of these equations. Please read my paper completely and learn about many contradictions in today's Special Relativity interpretation. I have worked on this subject more than 10 years and know all matters you have mentioned before. Please read my paper. Kind regards, and thanks for your discussion. No, in both of those cases you mentioned, you will use 𝑥′ = 𝛾(𝑥 - 𝑣𝑡), when you want to use Lorentz boost, without applying + or - for v sign, or else, instead of length contraction and time dilation, you will achieve length elongation and faster timing.

If a parameter is scalar like mass, density, ... it is characterized by magnitude and have no corresponding direction. They are physical quantities that are represented solely by magnitude as well as size. So, it has not a sign (+ or -). if a parameter is a vector, like velocity, acceleration, ... it has a sign. You mentioned the true statement. Here, in the Lorentz formulas, the velocity is not a vector. So, the inverse equations for S' observer is not the same as the main Lorentz equations. in inverse equations you will have +v instead of -v. That is why they are not symmetrical equations. No, the key point is that the velocity is a scalar parameter, not a vector here.

Please see the images I have attached from the main paper below to this topic. Thanks. No, dear. you just use the main Lorentz equations, regardless the direction of S' motion. It means, if the S' moves to the right, you use 𝑥 = 𝛾(𝑥′ - 𝑣𝑡′), and if the S' moves to the left, you use 𝑥 = 𝛾(𝑥′ - 𝑣𝑡′), again. the amount of V is important, not its direction. That is the key point.

Sorry, I have replied to somebody else. But, the answer to you is that, This is not as easy as you said. Have a look at these transformations first. In the Lorentz equations, the direction of motion is not important. It means, whether the S’ is moving to the right or to the left, the S observer applies the Lorentz relations without changing the sign of 𝑣. Therefore, we could argue that 𝑣 is a scalar not a vector quantity in the Lorentz relations. Hence, when these relations are inverse, only the quantity of 𝑣 is important not its direction and we must not change the sign of 𝑣. Thence, because the inverse equations are different with the main Lorentz equations, we must not consider them as symmetrical with each other. Please look at the images I have attached to this post from the main paper. Thanks.

Yes, there are many contradictions. Please read the paper first. Thanks This is not as easy as you said. Have a look at these transformations first. They are not symmetrical and I have demonstrated it by mathematics. Read the paper first. Thanks. Your mathematics is not true. First, you mention that β=v, which is not right. then, you mention γ′=γ, which is meaningless. What is meaning of γ′ or β′? did Einstein himself applied such kinds of meaningless terms himself? Your formula only imply that Lorentz transformation leaves the metric invariant. Yes, this is true. However, it does not mean that the Lorentz transformations are symmetrical. You have to refer to the main formula not to the variant, covariant or determinant of these formula to find how they are not symmetrical. Read my paper first. Thanks.

Since the introduction of Special theory of Relativity (SR), Lorentz invariance has been a fundamental part of our description of nature. Over the past decades, this (Lorentz invariance) was tested and verified by many research groups and almost no Lorentz violation has been found. However, when we look at the Lorentz transformations, we can mathematically find that they are not symmetrical relations. In fact, the inertial frames are not symmetrical in relation to each other and as a result, there must be a reference frame. If the inertial frames are symmetrical in relation to each other, as the SR argues, some paradoxes and contradictions are happened. Hence, we need to find the misconceptions in this theory. Many researches up to now, focused on Zero-Point Field (ZPF) as a cause for many physical phenomena like mass, inertia, and gravity. One can argue that the Lorentz transformations can be applied only for the inertial frames, moving inside the ZPF and the inertial frames, being at rest in relation to the ZPF, must not bear the Lorentz transformations. In addition, we have found that the SR and General Relativity (GR) are not two separated concepts. They are one thing and the space-time of them are the same. In both cases, it is the ZPF, which curves around the accelerated body or a gravitational mass, causing changes in the body’s length, time, and mass. The full-length published paper can be available via the following link: Bahari, Abouzar. " Zero-Point Field is the Cause for the Lorentz Transformations and Leads to Find Misconceptions about the Special Relativity" BULETIN FISIKA [Online], Volume 25 Number 1 (5 September 2022), ISSN 2580-9733, https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/buletinfisika/article/view/82042