Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
THE PROBLEMSWITHRELATIVITY
EINSTEIN WAS AN IDIOT
D T YARBROUGH
 
THE PROBLEM WITH RELATIVITY 
Einstein said that the speed of light is constant regardless of the speed of the observer.Had this been true, he would not have needed to add time dilation to his later theory. Now he's saying that when the speed of light appears to change, relative to a viewer,time has slowed down or sped up for the viewer. It doesn't seem to matter that twoviewers, one traveling at ¾ the speed of light and the other traveling at ½ the speed of light, while travelling away from or toward each other, both see the other as moving at 1¼ times the speed of light. Does time slow down the same for each of them, even thoughthey are traveling at different speeds relative to the medium they pass through? Does itspeed up for one and slow down for the other? Does time only change if you look?It's okay to add their speeds to determine their relative motion, but only as long as thatrelative motion does not exceed the speed of light. Why? Because Einstein said so?That's rediculous!He even said that the speed of light is not relative to the speed of the medium it passesthrough. This drawing represents the motion of light(red arrows) between two pairs of mirrors that are traveling at ½ the speed of light(blue arrows). It takes into considerationthat the light does move with the medium. Their speeds are additive.The spacing of the mirrors are such that it takes 3 time periods(green arrows) for light
 
to pass between them while stationary. If you can visualize what would happen if lightdidn't move with the medium, then you get the picture. Since there are a lot of peoplethat believe relativity, I guess I can only say that Einstein was relatively stupid.Einstein said that if anything exceeded the speed of light, even light itself, that itwould void the laws of causality. You might see the result before the cause. When itcomes to stupitity, he was really on a roll.Imagine that you see a result. The cause has already happened. Even if light from theresults could reach you at the speed of infinity, it can't even begin to propagate until after the cause has occured. No speed, even infinity can get you to the cause before ithappened, unless you go back in time. If you can go back in time, there's no hurry, sowhat does the speed of light have to do with it. Merely appearing that the resulthappened before the cause does not void the laws of causality. We see optical illusionsall the time. That doesn't break any laws of nature.Using Einstein's logic, if you didn't see the cause, you can ignore the results. Okay, somaybe I'm stretching it a bit, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he said that. Read thenext paragraph. It appears he did say that.Most scientist's agree that objects at the edge of the expanding universe are travelingaway from us at greater than the speed of light. But they say that doesn't void Einstein'sspeed of light law, since we can't see them. We'll, supposedly, we can see them todaywith our latest telescopes. And what does being able to see them have to do withanything? You can't have it both ways.It does appear that light can not exceed the speed of light in a vacumn relative to themedium it is passing through. But that does not mean that you can't add the speed of themedium to obtain lights speed relative to something outside the medium, or evensomething within the medium, if it is, itself, in motion relative to the medium. Evenlights speed relative to the medium it passes through has been recently challenged, butwill probability fail to hold up under scrutiny.Einstein said that mass warps spacetime, thus causing gravity, time dilation, etc. Thereis no such thing as spacetime. Time is not an entity. Time is only a perception. In a way,mass does distort space, or at least the vibration of matter and thus the density of spacearound it. This does create the forces of gravity. I'll have to admit he was half right.Einstein said that E=MC
2
. When it comes to particles such as photons, electrons, etc.,energy is constant, independent of speed. As the particle accelerates, its spin slows. Thisreduces it's magnetic field and mass. This field size is inversely proportional to C, notC
2
. Particles have no mass, but their magnetic fields do. You can stop looking for theHiggs Boson, unless it is what makes up magnetic fields. I call that one the Magneton.Unlike other particles, it has no field of its own. Its mass and energy remains unchanged,since its overall speed never changes. As the particle speeds up, the magneton slowsdown relative to the particle. Otherwise, it would break the speed limit.
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more