Simple Assumption Errors Invalidated Relativity - Revision history

DeHilster: /* Abstract */

2017-01-25T17:26:19Z

Abstract

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:26, 25 January 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	Some critical flaws resulting from inadequate control of assumptions are: * Lorentz and Einstein inadvertently attributed the variability of an observed light path over some fixed length to the fixed length itself. That fixed length does NOT vary with observed velocity; it's the observed light path length which DOES vary per Lorentz-type transformations.. This critical error is irrefutably shown in a copy of parts of Einstein's own 1905 text in the appendix to this paper. That led to other critical errors in Special Relativity. When corrected, we see that light speed c is reasonably constant when measured in the frame of its source; however its speed really is seen to be different when measured by a moving observer. The error in presuming variation in physical lengths resulted in incorrectly presumed increases in mass with velocity reaching infinity at light speed c. Those are also incorrect. It's the light path length which varies and that has no discernable influence on mass.		Some critical flaws resulting from inadequate control of assumptions are:
			* Lorentz and Einstein inadvertently attributed the variability of an observed light path over some fixed length to the fixed length itself. That fixed length does NOT vary with observed velocity; it's the observed light path length which DOES vary per Lorentz-type transformations.. This critical error is irrefutably shown in a copy of parts of Einstein's own 1905 text in the appendix to this paper. That led to other critical errors in Special Relativity. When corrected, we see that light speed c is reasonably constant when measured in the frame of its source; however its speed really is seen to be different when measured by a moving observer. The error in presuming variation in physical lengths resulted in incorrectly presumed increases in mass with velocity reaching infinity at light speed c. Those are also incorrect. It's the light path length which varies and that has no discernable influence on mass.
	* Einstein also assumed that elapsed time of that observed light travel varies; it does not, as explained here. So, there never has been a ?twin paradox? once assumptions are controlled.		* Einstein also assumed that elapsed time of that observed light travel varies; it does not, as explained here. So, there never has been a ?twin paradox? once assumptions are controlled.
	* Minkowski based his ?Space-time? on assumptions that zero can equal one. Also that light can arrive before it leaves. Both are incorrect and hence his space-time concepts can also be rejected.		* Minkowski based his "Space-time" on assumptions that zero can equal one. Also that light can arrive before it leaves. Both are incorrect and hence his space-time concepts can also be rejected.
	* Michelson-Morley's experimental equipment was unable to recognize variability of observed c'. That's because its round-trip travel of light beams obscured the measurement of comparative light speeds.		* Michelson-Morley's experimental equipment was unable to recognize variability of observed c'. That's because its round-trip travel of light beams obscured the measurement of comparative light speeds.
	* One simple method for improving assumption controls is suggested.		* One simple method for improving assumption controls is suggested.

			The assumptions used here are listed at the end of this
			paper.

			== Erroneous switch from variable light path s’ to fixed length L ==
			=== Background and description of this flaw: ===
			A century ago, Lorentz [1], Fitzgerald [2], Einstein [3] and others incorrectly assumed that a physical length L varies with relative velocity v . It does not. Rather, it is the observed light path length s’ of light passing over that length L which does vary with relative velocity v (per Galilean expectations [4. 5]) -- not the length L. Sadly, the resulting errors from this lack of assumption controls have
			endured for the past century without detection.

			Consider the x- and x’-axes in Figs 1a and 1b, on which there are 2 observers P and Q respectively. Those
			axes are moving apart at velocity v. There is a fixed length rod of length L (with points a and b at each end) on the xaxis as shown.

			In Fig. 1a, per Galilean relativity, observer P sees himself and length L as stationary and the x’-axis and observer Q moving to the left at v.

			In Fig 1b, observer Q sees herself as stationary on the x’-axis and that the x-axis and observer P and length L are all moving to the right at v. This easily disregarded relativistic nature of observations by humans will be found to be of great importance here.

			Now, consider Fig. 2a where a light flash occurs at time t1 at point a on the x-axis. That marks point a’ on the x’-axis also. An instant later, as shown in Fig. 2b, that light has passed over length L at speed c and arrived at point b on the x-axis at time t2. At that instant, the arriving light beam also marks point b’ on the x’-axis. The light beam over the x-axis has traveled at speed c, so path length s is:

			<math>s = L = c(t_2 - t_1)</math>

	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-02T02:55:18Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:55, 1 January 2017
Line 20:		Line 20:
	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T18:03:49Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:03, 1 January 2017
Line 18:		Line 18:
	* One simple method for improving assumption controls is suggested.		* One simple method for improving assumption controls is suggested.

	[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|simple assumption errors invalidated relativity]]

	[[Category:Relativity]]		[[Category:Relativity]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T02:23:16Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Simple Assumption Errors Invalidated Relativity
| url = [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_80.pdf Link to paper]
| author = [[Neil E Munch]]
| published = 2008
| journal = [[None]]
| num_pages = 6
}}

'''Read the full paper''' [http://www.naturalphilosophy.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_80.pdf here]

==Abstract==

Some critical flaws resulting from inadequate control of assumptions are: * Lorentz and Einstein inadvertently attributed the variability of an observed light path over some fixed length to the fixed length itself. That fixed length does NOT vary with observed velocity; it's the observed light path length which DOES vary per Lorentz-type transformations.. This critical error is irrefutably shown in a copy of parts of Einstein's own 1905 text in the appendix to this paper. That led to other critical errors in Special Relativity. When corrected, we see that light speed c is reasonably constant when measured in the frame of its source; however its speed really is seen to be different when measured by a moving observer. The error in presuming variation in physical lengths resulted in incorrectly presumed increases in mass with velocity reaching infinity at light speed c. Those are also incorrect. It's the light path length which varies and that has no discernable influence on mass.
* Einstein also assumed that elapsed time of that observed light travel varies; it does not, as explained here. So, there never has been a ?twin paradox? once assumptions are controlled.
* Minkowski based his ?Space-time? on assumptions that zero can equal one. Also that light can arrive before it leaves. Both are incorrect and hence his space-time concepts can also be rejected.
* Michelson-Morley's experimental equipment was unable to recognize variability of observed c'. That's because its round-trip travel of light beams obscured the measurement of comparative light speeds.
* One simple method for improving assumption controls is suggested.

[[Category:Scientific Paper]]

[[Category:Relativity]]