A Brief Reexamination of Relativity: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Imported from text file |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation.[[Category:Scientific Paper]] | The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation. | ||
[[Category:Scientific Paper|brief reexamination relativity]] | |||
[[Category:Relativity]] | [[Category:Relativity]] | ||
Revision as of 11:53, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | A Brief Reexamination of Relativity |
| Author(s) | Shao-Zhi Xu |
| Keywords | Relativity |
| Published | 1997 |
| Journal | None |
Abstract
The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation.