Conclusions
We have carried out a study of basic postulates of special
theory of relativity and established that
Einstein has introduced his L-postulate, ignoring the
physical properties of material space and basically distorting the phenomenology of
Maxwell’s conception which premised the existence of material substance for
propagation of electromagnetic excitation in space. In fact, Einstein has separated the
Maxwellian formulas from his phenomenological basis that defined the regularities which
they described. Later this caused Einstein to deny the initial statement of problem and to
return the concept of aether to his conception. He did so, having not corrected the
initial formalism yielded with misunderstanding. This last made the relativistic
conception fully discrepant and caused in frames of its phenomenology and formalism an
avalanche of paradoxes and inadequate assumptions contradicting the relativistic postulate
of full equivalence of inertial reference frames.
When Lorentz – Einstein transformation, the
conventional idea of reference frame turn around in the Minkowski space is incorrect. This
transformation makes a non-orthogonal shear deformation of the initial frame in the
spatial and time axes at the same time. Due to this discrepancy between the relativistic
representation and real transformation, in their visualisation appears a complex angle of
turn and transformation coefficients opposite to those which Relativity predicts.
If we proceed from the full equivalence of inertial
reference frames which relativists have taken as an underpinning of the relativity
principle, then, first, the time transformation has to be absent, and second, the
acceleration of any frame (or both) before the study cannot cause the one-side contraction
of space and time in one of frames.
Attempts of relativists to solve the problem of one-sided
contraction of space-time with the help of GR formalism are incorrect. If SR operates with
mutually moving frames, in this way it premises that one or both frames have accelerated
before. As a consequence, before introducing its formalism, SR violates the principle of
equivalence of inertial frames on which the whole derivation of Einsteinian transformation
is based.
The transformation of time in passing from one inertial
frame to another with the Lorentz – Einstein transformation is not constant and
depends on the pattern and, the main, on the direction of motion of the body with respect
to the chosen inertial frames.
The non-simultaneity of which relativists say is imaginary
and depends on the choice of coordinate system. Factually, due to the arbitrarily chosen
frame, this causes an ambiguity of the absolute value of non-simultaneity and contradicts
the conditions for which Einstein derived his transformation, namely – contradicts
the introduction of physical time in both inertial frames.
When the absolute values of time predicted by
transformation with the local physical time of the frame have been agreed, the new
transformation disagrees with the Einsteinian L-postulate, the time contractions
become independent of the state of body’s motion and the events become simultaneous.
The yielded results unambiguously evidence wrong the
relativistic interpretations of physical laws of the light propagation in space and of the
idea of equivalence of inertial reference frames. This causes the full incorrectness of
the relativistic conception as the whole that produces nothing except discrepancies and
absurd corollaries and conclusions. |