THE GREAT ERROR OF EINSTEIN (The proof)

[tsolkas]

“Equivalence Principle” of the General Theory of Relativity, is absolutely wrong!

 

more.....http://www.tsolkas.gr/english/document1/principle-equivalence/principle-equivalence.html

 

Christos A . Tsolkas

[ajb]

If your mathematics are correct, then I think you have interpreted it wrong. As far as the mass m1 is concerned, the lower mass m2 behaves as if it were part of the larger mass M. So I don't see why the velocites would be the same anyway.

 

 

The equivalence principle states

 

1) Inertial Mass = Gravitational mass.

2) Space-Time is locally flat (i.e. a manifold).

3) The laws of physics reduce locally to that of special relativity.

 

there are weaker versions, where 3 is removed.

 

So far the equivalence principle has passed every test thrown at it.

[woelen]

Moderator action: moved to pseudoscience.

 

This is one of MANY MANY claims about relativity being wrong. This does not belong in the science forums. Feel free, however, to continue discussion and posting over here.

[5614]

tsolkas what do you want us to do?

 

Tell you that you are wrong?

 

Or is this meant to be a breakthrough in science? In that case I suggest you send it to a journal and get it published, then again I'd also suggest you don't waste their time.

 

Sorry man, but woelen is right on with the move to pseudoscience.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Tsolkas has never graced us with replies to any criticisms, so I suggest you don't waste your time.

[YT2095]

anyone else notice that TSOLKAS is almost an Anagram of "Ass Talk"?

or is it just Me and my warped imagination?

[GutZ]

anyone else notice that TSOLKAS is almost an Anagram of "Ass Talk"?

or is it just Me and my warped imagination?

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

That is the greatest random comment on these boards. Thank you that made my day.

 

Ontopic:

 

Put it to the test! I want to see nature duplicate it, or rather your result duplicate nature. Untill then when a ball is dropped it goes up not down.

[THoR]

YT2095

The Resourceful One

 

Join Date: Aug 2003

Location: N:52`31.7, W:002`04, Alt:492ft

Posts: 10,390

 

anyone else notice that TSOLKAS is almost an Anagram of "Ass Talk"?

or is it just Me and my warped imagination?

__________________

Just Say "KNOW".

 

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

 

Yesterday, 02:41 PM #7

GutZ

Baryon

 

Join Date: Apr 2006

Location: Ottawa, Ontario

Posts: 138

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by YT2095

anyone else notice that TSOLKAS is almost an Anagram of "Ass Talk"?

or is it just Me and my warped imagination?

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

That is the greatest random comment on these boards. Thank you that made my day.

 

Ontopic:

 

Put it to the test! I want to see nature duplicate it, or rather your result duplicate nature. Untill then when a ball is dropped it goes up not down.

 

The conventional wisdom used to be the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the Universe. Every scientific breakthrough known to humanity came from individuals who questioned the status quo and challenged the conventional wisdom. Science is ill served by those who ridicule and belittle. It is an affliction of the dull minded.

[insane_alien]

Thor, tsolkas has been refuted ad nauseum and has never replied to any critisisms. There is a limit to how far you can push outside the boundaries of mainstream physics and still be possible. tsolkas is well beyond that limit.

[YT2095]

IA don`t bother man, he`s either one of his Muppets or annoyed he never noticed/thought of it 1`st

[timo]

Every scientific breakthrough known to humanity came from individuals who questioned the status quo and challenged the conventional wisdom.

I don´t know for sure but I doubt the validity of that statement.

 

I think scientific breakthroughs "hang in the air" quite long before the point which historically will be considered "the breakthrough" is there. Who is the lonely guy sitting in his appartement all night working out quantum mechanics, for example? Afaik there is none, because it´s been a whole comunity working on it an bringing it step by step to today´s form.

Even relativity, which is very tightly bound to the name Einstein, was not invented by Einstein out of nothing. At least the fact that two of the most important tools in (special-)relativity are the "Minkowsky space" and the "Lorentz transformations" makes me think so. Besides: Relativity hang in the air, because it was less a "challenge the conventional wisdom" than an attempt to explain the well-known inconsistencies in available theories.

 

Or let´s take a more up-to-date example: Suppose next week Martin writes a paper where he manages to derive the complete Standard Model of particle physics as a low-energy approximation of Loop Quantum Gravity and also shows that LQG is free of inconsistencies up to arbitrary energies. Let´s furthermore suppose he also manages to make some predictions of where the Standard Model and LQG will give different results and that the LQG results are indeed measured at the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva.

Even when you ignore the fact that such a big shot is not likely to be achieved by a single person and that there´s thousands of other people involved in the LHC experiment alone: You probably saw the large amount of LQG papers Martin regularly posts here for discussion. Would Martin fit to your picture of an "individual who questions the status quo and challenges the conventional wisdom"? I am pretty sure in fifty years, that´s what people would think because no one would remember the names of today´s "LQG pioneers" anymore.

[THoR]

Thor, tsolkas has been refuted ad nauseum and has never replied to any critisisms. There is a limit to how far you can push outside the boundaries of mainstream physics and still be possible. tsolkas is well beyond that limit.

 

Understood, but there are ways of handling the situation without becoming an obnoxious jerk like ....

 

YT2095

The Resourceful One

Posts: 10,391

 

IA don`t bother man, he`s either one of his Muppets or annoyed he never noticed/thought of it 1`st

__________________

Just Say "KNOW".

[THoR]

I don´t know for sure but I doubt the validity of that statement.

 

I think scientific breakthroughs "hang in the air" quite long before the point which historically will be considered "the breakthrough" is there. Who is the lonely guy sitting in his appartement all night working out quantum mechanics' date=' for example? Afaik there is none, because it´s been a whole comunity working on it an bringing it step by step to today´s form.

Even relativity, which is very tightly bound to the name Einstein, was not invented by Einstein out of nothing. At least the fact that two of the most important tools in (special-)relativity are the "Minkowsky space" and the "Lorentz transformations" makes me think so. Besides: Relativity hang in the air, because it was less a "challenge the conventional wisdom" than an attempt to explain the well-known inconsistencies in available theories.

 

Or let´s take a more up-to-date example: Suppose next week Martin writes a paper where he manages to derive the complete Standard Model of particle physics as a low-energy approximation of Loop Quantum Gravity and also shows that LQG is free of inconsistencies up to arbitrary energies. Let´s furthermore suppose he also manages to make some predictions of where the Standard Model and LQG will give different results and that the LQG results are indeed measured at the Large Hadron Collider in Geneva.

Even when you ignore the fact that such a big shot is not likely to be achieved by a single person and that there´s thousands of other people involved in the LHC experiment alone: You probably saw the large amount of LQG papers Martin regularly posts here for discussion. Would Martin fit to your picture of an "individual who questions the status quo and challenges the conventional wisdom"? I am pretty sure in fifty years, that´s what people would think because no one would remember the names of today´s "LQG pioneers" anymore.[/quote']

 

Actually I used the term individuals plurally on purpose - people who think out of the box - 'individual' connotating those who don't follow the herd rather than a single person thinking independently...damn semantics anyway.

[swansont]

The conventional wisdom used to be the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the Universe. Every scientific breakthrough known to humanity came from individuals who questioned the status quo and challenged the conventional wisdom. Science is ill served by those who ridicule and belittle. It is an affliction of the dull minded.

 

"But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."

(Carl Sagan)

 

"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that

you be persecuted by an unkind establishment; you must also be right."

(Robert Park)

 

 

The issue is not so much that Tsolkas has a contrary viewpoint, it's that he doesn't stay here to defend it. He's a hit-and-run troll, and that is what is being ridiculed and belittled here.

[YT2095]

- people who think out of the box

 

even just Using that term alone is almost an oxymoron, it`s so Cliche` now that folks that Use that saying, are actualy Inside this box and can`t use the tools within it adequately and thus end up copying. Copying such sayings for instance!

or maybe I should just "get with the Program"? in oder to "give it Closeure"

 

btw, it`s awefully Rude to just jump into the middle of a thread and hurl abuse when you DON`T know the full history behind it:mad:

 

oh yeah, and there IS NO "Box"!

[swansont]

"Think outside the box" used in this context is often a cop-out, used to excuse the lack of evidence for and rigorous analysis in support of a particular position.

[bascule]

The great error of Einstein was writing off quantum to the degree he did.

 

I think this just goes to show that Einstein was a conceptualist thinker who, after developing his concept (SR/GR) was really out of good ideas. That's how conceptualists tend to work (e.g. Raphael, Picasso, Jean Baptiste Seurat, Orson Welles, Andy Warhol)

[5614]

The great error of Einstein was writing off quantum to the degree he did.

Yep.

 

Einstein was wrong twice, that I'm aware of.

 

Firstly when he disagreed with QM and secondly when he said that E=mc² does not mean mass can be converted into energy. This second error was disproved during his lifetime. However he died before, what he thought was an error with QM, was shown to actually be correct.

[Sayonara]

anyone else notice that TSOLKAS is almost an Anagram of "Ass Talk"?

or is it just Me and my warped imagination?

Sorry but it's your warped imagination.

 

TSOLKAS = "Ass Tolk" or "Oss Talk".

 

[insane_alien]

key word being ALMOST sayonara. your slipping.

[Sayonara]

O is 60% away from A in the vowels list.

 

That's not "almost"!

 

ps "you're"