V.6 No 1


On correctness of basic postulates of SR


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.

Contents: / 28 / 29 / 30 / 31 / 32 / 33 / 34 / 35 / 36 / 37 / 38 / 39 / 40 / 41 / 42 /

Hosted by uCoz