Total nonsense?
Correct math, nonsense models?
Legit?
I currently lean towards right math, nonsense models. I think Einstein observed that fields and velocity have a slight effect on atoms, so he made up all this magic stuff to sell it. Otherwise he would just be a normal scientist. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the math were all nonsense too hahaha.
Well the group here - John Chappell Philosophy Society - for those who think Einstein’s relativity is wrong they don’t agree on what part. Some will focus on the math and say it is wrong but disagree on what part of the math etc. In my view the main issue is the underdetermination that does not get properly addressed and then that leads to further mess.
Could you elaborate? (on underdetermination)
Google AI says -Underdetermination, a concept in the philosophy of science, posits that empirical evidence alone is often insufficient to definitively choose between competing theories. It suggests that for any set of data, multiple, mutually incompatible theories can explain it equally well, meaning evidence does not mandate a single truth.
In the case of SR - the empirical evidence that supports SR is said to also support Lorentz theory.
Oh I fully agree! Let’s just merge this into 1 discussion I guess though. We are basically talking about the exact same thing in the other thread. Yes there is obvious bias! I like the way you think.
I have made thread on - Underdetermination in relativity.
Greeting to the community.
Relativity is totally wrong both in math and model. Let me share some thought.
There are a lot of discussions about relativistic time dilation. Some of them blame math, some blame model, but none of such discussions mentioned the huge difference between reality and theory of relativity.
Such difference lays in the way how relativistic theory treats time. There is no time in classical physics, by the word “time” we always mean “time interval”. The velocity is distance over time where time is simply measured from the beginning of our journey, it is always an interval.
Relativity gives us completely different concept – absolute time. We could look at Einstein’s work where “time is the position of the hands of watch”.
Relativistic time is absolute; it is fourth coordinate in space-time continuum and it become absolutely clear by taking a look at Lorentz transformation and clock synchronization.
Using absolute time concept, we could take a fresh look at famous twin paradox. Here we need to refresh our memory with Lorentz transformation. Time in moving rocket equals gamma-factor by time in stationary frame. So, the clock in moving system will show “bigger” time.
Look at twin paradox below:
1. At the beginning of the journey both Earth’s and rocket’s clocks show the same time.
2. At mid distance to the destination the rocket’s clock shows the maximum time value.
3. At the approach of the destination rocket stops and clock shows the same time value as on Earth.
Please note that the hands of the clock behave exactly in accordance with the theory of special relativity, it is just the concept of time was changed, it is fourth dimension after all.
The most interesting part of our journey is approaching the destination with speed reduction (deceleration).
As we can see, the hands of rocket’s clock are in the same position as the hands of Earth’s clock. No surprises, if you put zero speed into Lorentz transformation formula when rocket stops at distant galaxy, you will get exactly same time value.
For our surprise, the hands of the moving clock going backwards during deceleration. We can get same result very easily, just by looking at Lorentz transformation formula. during next iteration time value will be calculated with smaller gamma-factor and will be less compared to previous value of time.
Well, the time on rocket is not going back under all conditions, we should add normal flow of the time on top of that. Backward feature could only be observed at bigger velocities like v=0.7c or bigger. It is quite easy to put Lorentz transformation formula in excel and see the result of deceleration
Causality principle is not working in special relativity during deceleration! Time cannot flow backward!
Time dilation is not the change of time flow rate on moving ship, it is how time flow on the moving reference frame LOOKS for stationary observer. This became clearer by taking a closer look at Einstein’s thought experiment in his “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”.
Hi yall, I also just joined the forum, I have a youtube channel but that didn’t go well, let’s see if there are some nice discussions on this forum.
To address the topic, I believe it is total nonsense, I honestly believe even einstein knew it was nonsense, and I honestly believe a very big % of media knows it is nonsense too, like dunno maybe more than a 15% to say a number, it is a weird… nobody can leave the wagon now, if you are the only one that does you just get punished by everyone else, so they just keep the nonsense going, I believe einstein was probably just messing around on his only humble spoken 1905 paper and then when he saw it was getting popular just kept the nonsense going on a more arrogant tone, I don’t consider the einstein and relativity drama science, I consider it human psychology, sociology and history.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the math were fraud too hahaha. I emailed almost every physicist in North America and asked them the same set of basic questions, and 35% of the time their answers contradict. How can the math work if people are using different equations for the exact same scenario?
The math of the first thing, “special relativity” is technically correct, but that can’t matter any less, “special relativity” is based on an incorrect assumption that the speed of light always has the exact same relative velocity against everything else in the universe, einstein just assumed that because he could and because he was a free and independent woman, oh wait… and the second thing, “general relativity”, is honestly… such a… bruh… to this very day the only thing I have ever seen is an equation with undefined terms, which basically makes the equation completely meaningless, suposed selfclaimed “experts” including einstein say it is based on the first thing, “special relativity” which is bogus, so something claimed by bogus people supposedly based on something bogus with an undefined equation, is probably bogus too. hope that clears thing for yall.