Pulsars contradict theory of relativity

[swansont]

You didn't exactly phrase your post in a way that, in conjunction with previous discussion, lends itself to explanation of your errors. It's pretty clear that you have decided that relativity is wrong, but it's equally clear that you don't understand and can't properly apply it. What's the incentive to correct you, when you are resistant to correction?

[Bart]

You didn't exactly phrase your post in a way that, in conjunction with previous discussion, lends itself to explanation of your errors. It's pretty clear that you have decided that relativity is wrong, but it's equally clear that you don't understand and can't properly apply it. What's the incentive to correct you, when you are resistant to correction?

 

The theory of relativity since its publication, is disputed by many outstanding physicists, among others, by genius Tesla, which had more than 1,200 patents, Einstein did not have any. From the announcement of the theory of relativity in 1905, was published a few thousand (!) scientific articles and books written by well-educated physicists, demonstrating the fallacy of this theory. Here, for example, only a few titles in recent years..

 

1. Arteha S.N., Critical Remarks to the Relativity Theory, Spacetime & Substance 2005, v. 6, № 1 (26), pp. 14-20.
2. Brinkmann, Karl: Grundfehler der Relativitätstheorie, © 1988, ISBN 3-89180-019-3, Hohenrain Verlag GmbH, 280 Seiten.
3. Essen, Louis 1971: The Special Theory of Relativity: a critical analysis / L. Essen. - Oxford: Clarendon Pr. 1971. 27 S.
4. Galeczki, Georg: Requiem für die Spezielle Relativität, / Georg Galeczki, Peter Marquardt. - Frankfurt a. M.: Haag u. Herchen, 1997, 271 S.
5. Gulati, Paul S.: Big howler, Einstein’s Theory of special relativity. 1982.
6. Relativity, time, and reality: a critical investigation of the Einstein Theory of Relativity from a logical point of view / by Harald Nordenson. -London: Allen and Unwin 1969. 214 S.
7. Parish, Leonard 1977, The logical flaws of Einstein's relativity / by Leonard Parish. - Luton: Cortney Publications 1977. 171 S
8. Rebigsol, Cameron Y.: Mathematical invalidity of relativity. 1996
9. Sekerin, Vladimir Ilich: The relativity theory - the mystification of the century 1991.
10. Tipnis, Sharad D.: Einstein’s relativity the greatest fallacy in the twentieth century, 1985
11. AAAS, Pacific Division. Meeting, San Francisco 1994. Proceedings.. Xu, Shaozhi: Two conclusive proofs of variation of light velocity.
12. Galilean electrodynamics. 9. 1998, Nr. 2, S. 23-27. Agathangelidis, Antonis: Experimental disproof of special relativity theory.
13. Barth, Gotthard: Der gigantische Betrug mit Einstein, historisch und mathematisch, © 1987, 92 Seiten

Edited March 14, 2013 by Bart

[swansont]

 

The theory of relativity since its publication, is disputed by many outstanding physicists, among others, by genius Tesla, which had more than 1,200 patents, Einstein did not have any.

 

And Linus Pauling thought vitamin C could cure cancer. Argument from authority is a fallacy.

 

 

 

From the announcement of the theory of relativity in 1905, was published a few thousand (!) scientific articles and books written by well-educated physicists, demonstrating the fallacy of this theory. Here, for example, only a few titles in recent years..

 

1. Arteha S.N., Critical Remarks to the Relativity Theory, Spacetime & Substance 2005, v. 6, № 1 (26), pp. 14-20.
2. Brinkmann, Karl: Grundfehler der Relativitätstheorie, © 1988, ISBN 3-89180-019-3, Hohenrain Verlag GmbH, 280 Seiten.
3. Essen, Louis 1971: The Special Theory of Relativity: a critical analysis / L. Essen. - Oxford: Clarendon Pr. 1971. 27 S.
4. Galeczki, Georg: Requiem für die Spezielle Relativität, / Georg Galeczki, Peter Marquardt. - Frankfurt a. M.: Haag u. Herchen, 1997, 271 S.
5. Gulati, Paul S.: Big howler, Einstein’s Theory of special relativity. 1982.
6. Relativity, time, and reality: a critical investigation of the Einstein Theory of Relativity from a logical point of view / by Harald Nordenson. -London: Allen and Unwin 1969. 214 S.
7. Parish, Leonard 1977, The logical flaws of Einstein's relativity / by Leonard Parish. - Luton: Cortney Publications 1977. 171 S
8. Rebigsol, Cameron Y.: Mathematical invalidity of relativity. 1996
9. Sekerin, Vladimir Ilich: The relativity theory - the mystification of the century 1991.
10. Tipnis, Sharad D.: Einstein’s relativity the greatest fallacy in the twentieth century, 1985
11. AAAS, Pacific Division. Meeting, San Francisco 1994. Proceedings.. Xu, Shaozhi: Two conclusive proofs of variation of light velocity.
12. Galilean electrodynamics. 9. 1998, Nr. 2, S. 23-27. Agathangelidis, Antonis: Experimental disproof of special relativity theory.
13. Barth, Gotthard: Der gigantische Betrug mit Einstein, historisch und mathematisch, © 1987, 92 Seiten

 

Lots of folks think evolution is wrong, too. So what? What someone thinks doesn't make them right. I don't care what people claim in uncritical books or fringe journals, it's whether the model fits observation. Most critiques of relativity make it clear the person doesn't understand relativity, because they misapply it.

 

I've read, for example, some of Essen's criticism. he claims that c being constant "is contrary to the foundations of science" which is clearly BS, because constant c is a requirement of electrodynamics, i.e. Essen is simply wrong, and any criticism of relativity that follows based on that error is flawed. There's also quite a bit of melodrama when he mistakes being wrong for being persecuted.

[Bart]

To dispel my some doubts of interpretation SR theory, could you please give a solution for the following example:

 

Let the point A is far from B with L = 400 000 000 km. At the same time from point A and B, start 2 rockets to meet with each other. The rocket from the point A is moving at v1 = 260 000 km / s, the rocket from the point B is moving at v2 = 140 000 km / s.

The question is:

 

How many seconds, according to the theory of relativity, will elapse on the clocks in rockets, since the start until meeting:

1. seen by the passengers in the rockets?

2. seen by an observer at rest ?

 

This is not a homework.

[swansont]

 

 

To dispel my some doubts of interpretation SR theory, could you please give a solution for the following example:

 

Let the point A is far from B with L = 400 000 000 km. At the same time from point A and B, start 2 rockets to meet with each other. The rocket from the point A is moving at v1 = 260 000 km / s, the rocket from the point B is moving at v2 = 140 000 km / s.

 

The question is:

 

How many seconds, according to the theory of relativity, will elapse on the clocks in rockets, since the start until meeting:

 

1. seen by the passengers in the rockets?

 

2. seen by an observer at rest ?

 

This is not a homework.

 

 

An outside observer sees them meet after 1000. seconds. 4e8 km is 1333 light-seconds. A travels 866.6 light-seconds, while B travels 466.6 light-seconds

 

2.6e5 km/s is .866c, a gamma of 2. A sees the travel distance of 433 light seconds, taking 500 seconds.

1.4e5 km/s is .466c, a gamma of 1.13. B sees his travel distance as 413 light seconds, taking 885 seconds.

[Bart]

An outside observer sees them meet after 1000. seconds. 4e8 km is 1333 light-seconds. A travels 866.6 light-seconds, while B travels 466.6 light-seconds

 

2.6e5 km/s is .866c, a gamma of 2. A sees the travel distance of 433 light seconds, taking 500 seconds.

1.4e5 km/s is .466c, a gamma of 1.13. B sees his travel distance as 413 light seconds, taking 885 seconds.

 

Thanks for your reply, but I defined my question probably not quite clear .

 

An outside observer will see 1000 seconds on his own clock. My question is what the observer will see on the clocks in rockets?

 

According to SR, the rockets approaching each other with the resulting relativistic speed of 284 810 km / s . How does this apply to the clock displays in the rockets, and on the local time of their meeting?

 

 

 

[Janus]

Thanks for your reply, but I defined my question probably not quite clear .

 

An outside observer will see 1000 seconds on his own clock. My question is what the observer will see on the clocks in rockets?

 

According to SR, the rockets approaching each other with the resulting relativistic speed of 284 810 km / s . How does this apply to the clock displays in the rockets, and on the local time of their meeting?

 

 

 

The outside observer sees the same reading on the ship's clocks when they meet as the observers in each ship see on their own clock.

 

As far as the relative velocty between ships as measured by the ships is concerned, we can look at it using relativistic Doppler shift.

 

When the ship leaves point A he sees Ship B as it was 1333 sec ago. Upon reaching 0.866c, he sees events at B doppler shifted at a rate of ~3.73, so after ~357 sec by his own clock, he sees the ship leave B, and then sees the clock on ship B Doppler shifted by a factor of ~6.18 for ~143 sec. This means he sees Ship B's clock advance by ~885 sec from the time he sees the ship leave B to the time they meet.

 

Upon reaching 0.466c, Ship B sees events at point A Doppler shifted by a fact of ~1.66 so after ~803 sec by his clock he sees ship A start on its trip. For the next ~82 sec he sees ship A Doppler shifted by a factor ~6.18. Thus he sees Ship A's clock advance ~500 sec from the time it leaves point a to the time they meet.

 

Thus the outside observer observers in both ships agree as to how much time elapses fro each ship between their starting their trip and the meeting of the ships.

[Bart]

The outside observer sees the same reading on the ship's clocks when they meet as the observers in each ship see on their own clock.

........

 

Thus the outside observer observers in both ships agree as to how much time elapses fro each ship between their starting their trip and the meeting of the ships.

 

 

I do not understand it. How did you get it? The outside observer, due to the Doppler effect, would see the clocks in the rockets, different when standing at point A, different when standing at point B, and different when standing far away from the line of rocket movement.

 

 

When the ship leaves point A he sees Ship B as it was 1333 sec ago. Upon reaching 0.866c, he sees events at B doppler shifted at a rate of ~3.73, so after ~357 sec by his own clock, he sees the ship leave B, and then sees the clock on ship B Doppler shifted by a factor of ~6.18 for ~143 sec. This means he sees Ship B's clock advance by ~885 sec from the time he sees the ship leave B to the time they meet.

 

 

At a speed of 260 000 km/s for the ship A, the clocks on board, according to SR, will slow down by 2. So why you have 357sec ?

[Janus]

 

 

I do not understand it. How did you get it? The outside observer, due to the Doppler effect, would see the clocks in the rockets, different when standing at point A, different when standing at point B, and different when standing far away from the line of rocket movement.

Let's take standing at A:

 

He sees the Ship leave at 0.866c. The Doppler shift ratio for this speed is ~0.268 (because ship A is receding). After 1000 sec by his clock Ship A and Ship B should meet. However, this meeting point is 866.6 light sec from the observer, so it will take an additional 866.6 sec before he sees the ships meet. Thus for 1866.6 sec he will see the the clock on Ship A tick at a rate of ~0.268, and therefore see ~500 sec accumulate on the Ship's clock between leaving A and meeting the other ship.

 

B is 1333 light sec away, So he won't see the ship leave B until 1333 sec have passed on his clock. (He actually won't see the ship leave after the ships have met by his clock. Since ship B is approaching, once he sees it leave, he will see its clock Doppler shifted by a factor of ~1.66, Again, he'll see the ships meet when his clock reads 1866.6 sec. Thus he sees Ship B's clock Doppler shifted for ~533.6 sec and accumulate ~885 sec from the time it leaves B until the Ships leave.

 

You can do the same thing with the observer at B and you will end up with the same final conclusion.

 

It doesn't matter where you put the Observer, As long as you properly account for light propagation delay and Doppler shift, he will always see ship A and ship B accumulate the same amount of time as the ships themselves say they do.

 

 

 

 

At a speed of 260 000 km/s for the ship A, the clocks on board, according to SR, will slow down by 2. So why you have 357sec ?

Because I was calculating Relativistic Doppler shift not time dilation. Time dilation is what you would get if you could make a side by side comparison between the clocks. Relativistic Doppler shift is what you actually observe. Relativistic Doppler shift takes into account not only time dilation but the change in light propagation delay due to the changing distance between observer and source.

[Bart]

Let's take standing at A:

 

He sees the Ship leave at 0.866c. The Doppler shift ratio for this speed is ~0.268 (because ship A is receding). After 1000 sec by his clock Ship A and Ship B should meet. However, this meeting point is 866.6 light sec from the observer, so it will take an additional 866.6 sec before he sees the ships meet. Thus for 1866.6 sec he will see the the clock on Ship A tick at a rate of ~0.268, and therefore see ~500 sec accumulate on the Ship's clock between leaving A and meeting the other ship.

 

B is 1333 light sec away, So he won't see the ship leave B until 1333 sec have passed on his clock. (He actually won't see the ship leave after the ships have met by his clock. Since ship B is approaching, once he sees it leave, he will see its clock Doppler shifted by a factor of ~1.66, Again, he'll see the ships meet when his clock reads 1866.6 sec. Thus he sees Ship B's clock Doppler shifted for ~533.6 sec and accumulate ~885 sec from the time it leaves B until the Ships leave.

 

You can do the same thing with the observer at B and you will end up with the same final conclusion.

 

It doesn't matter where you put the Observer, As long as you properly account for light propagation delay and Doppler shift, he will always see ship A and ship B accumulate the same amount of time as the ships themselves say they do.

Because I was calculating Relativistic Doppler shift not time dilation. Time dilation is what you would get if you could make a side by side comparison between the clocks. Relativistic Doppler shift is what you actually observe. Relativistic Doppler shift takes into account not only time dilation but the change in light propagation delay due to the changing distance between observer and source.

 

 

 

Oh yes, if in the classical Doppler effect, we introduce the formula of relativistic time, instead of the classical time, we obtain the formula for the relativistic Doppler effect and then everything is mathematically correct.

 

Thank you very much for very clear explanation of this case.