Jump to content

Is Relativity Wrong?


Recommended Posts

Is Relativity Wrong?


I see in all of these space and physics documentaries on TV
that Einstein-this Einstein-that.

But then I saw that there are lots of YouTube videos
claiming to disprove special relativity and/or general relativity.


Videos such as:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em6ukitZ9wE

 

Is there any truth to these claims? If relativity somehow is
true, then how can it be claimed to be false so much in so many different ways
by so many different people?



Edited by Windevoid
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I understand that you believe SR devoutly, and that you find it very upsetting that there are infidels who do not share your faith, as you have said so many times, indeed I cannot recall you ever post

The modern theory of relativity was created by Lorentz et al, based on the speed of light being constant relative to the aether. Lorentz’s aether theory (LET) is simple and logical, and correctly pre

it has to be wrong to have so many conflict with other areas   http://youtu.be/vOrvVTFKDUA

Posted Images

I don't know terribly much about relativity myself, but I assume that the reason so many different people claim it to be false for so many different reasons because so many different people don't really understand what's going on (but think they do). The theory of evolution suffers from much the same problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any truth to these claims? If relativity somehow is

true, then how can it be claimed to be false so much in so many different ways

by so many different people?

 

There is no truth to those claims.

 

So what explains all of that nonsense against it? Some ultra-religious people think relativity must be wrong because it clashes with their religion. Some racists think that relativity must be wrong because a Jewish man came up with it. Some crackpots think that "if only I disprove relativity I will be more famous than Einstein".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relativity has been experimentally and observationally confirmed to an astounding degree. The reason you see so many youtubes denying the validity of relativity is because the are an astounding number of cranks in the world, and anybody can post any nonsense on youtube.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A list of many of the extensive agreements between predictions made by the theory of relativity and actual observations is given here: http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2006-3/

 

If someone doesn't like the theory of relativity, that's fine. They just need to demonstrate that their idea can go an even better job that what we have now. Science is actually very, very simple in this regard. Demonstrate that some new idea makes more accurate or more predictions than what we have now, and what we have now will be displaced. The vast, vast majority of people who feel a need to replace an idea however don't have anything that makes more accurate or more predictions. Again, science is very simple to understand in this regard... more predictions and accurate predictions wins.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't watched the videos, but from participation here it's clear that the majority of anti-relativity crackpots don't understand the theory itself. There's an underlying fallacious view that if the individual doesn't understand it (or it offends their sensibilities) then it can't be right, and that absolute time/length/simultaneity "makes sense" and that must be right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the one video and made it about an hour in before the lecture on the history of electricity switched too far over into whackadoo pseudoscience and conspiracy theories for me to bother sitting through any more of it waiting for the challenge to relativity to finally get outlined.

 

When you claim that a machine was designed in the 1800s that would allow you to stand in two locations simultaneously, and then seriously consider a question about whether this could be related to the Philadelphia Experiment, that is the point where you lose me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Relativity, both Special and General, is one the most tested theories in science, and has been verified to an astonishing degree.

 

I might be wrong, but can I really be wrong about this?

Not only can you be wrong, but you are wrong.

 

Your argument against it is basically argument by incredulity. i.e. You don't understand it, so it must be wrong.

Edited by ACG52
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone tried to move something faster than light?

Has anyone tried to go faster than light?

Or have they only used light itself.



I mean, water waves from the same source seem to go at the same speed regardless of source, but a jet plane can go faster than water waves and it doesn't do some voodoo thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure. They tried it with neutrinos. It didn't work.

 

Are you simply saying that you won't accept relativity regardless of the observational and experimental results? Cause if that's the case, there's no point in trying to teach you anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No.

Why not? Would it gain mass and not be light? But it's non-massy light right? Or not? Paradox?

 

Why not? Would it gain mass and not be light? But it's non-massy light right? Or not? Paradox?

 

And there's another reason to believe relativity is wrong. It's the only "science" to have paradoxes, and in such quantities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not? Would it gain mass and not be light? But it's non-massy light right? Or not? Paradox?

 

Why not? Would it gain mass and not be light? But it's non-massy light right? Or not? Paradox?

 

It would gain energy, and in doing so increase it's frequency and shorten its wavelength. It's speed however would remain unchanged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would gain energy, and in doing so increase it's frequency and shorten its wavelength. It's speed however would remain unchanged.

Uh, then its mass would have to increase.

 

If E=MC squared then light would have to have mass, but then it couldn't do the things that light is said to be able to do, because that is dependent on light not having mass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

E=mc2 is not the complete equation.

 

e2= m2c4+p2c2 is the complete form. For light, the first term m (rest mass) is zero, so the equation simplifies to e = pc, where p is momentum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, then its mass would have to increase.

 

If E=MC squared then light would have to have mass, but then it couldn't do the things that light is said to be able to do, because that is dependent on light not having mass.

 

 

For photons, energy is found by

 

[math]E = \frac{hc}{\lambda}[/math]

 

where h is Planck's constant and lambda is the wavelength.

 

The general formula for both zero and non-zero rest mass objects is

 

[math]E = \sqrt{m_o^2c^4+p^2c^2}[/math]

 

Where [math]m_o[/math] is the rest mass.

 

For light

 

[math]p= \frac{h}{\lambda}[/math]

and the rest mass is zero.

 

When one talks about light being massless, it is its rest mass that is 0.

Edited by Janus
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why not?

 

Because photons always travel at c.

 

Would it gain mass and not be light?

 

No. The mass does not change.

 

But it's non-massy light right? Or not?

 

Right.

 

Paradox?

 

No.

 

And there's another reason to believe relativity is wrong. It's the only "science" to have paradoxes, and in such quantities.

 

No. The so-called paradoxes only arise because of incorrect application of the theory. These "paradoxes" abound in math e.g. in the trick questions where you divide by zero. No paradox when you eliminate the "illegal" step.

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's probably best if you make an attempt to at lease study and understand basic physics and such

before stepping up to advance issues like this,

i see this a lot,
individuals will jump to relativity before even understanding basic physics,

i think hypervalent iodine makes a great point.

but I assume that the reason so many different people claim it to be false for so many different reasons because so many different people don't really understand what's going on (but think they do).


Link to post
Share on other sites

We understand General Relativity, GR is wrong as it is presently written with a constant that predicts expansion, period.

 

Bignose's post -demonstrate 'more accurate or more predictions' and 'will be displaced' -is correct.

 

Snell's theory does demonstrate, more accurate, better predictions, so as to disprove present GR and more perfectly match theory/science with the universe/mass/space etc.

 

The questions about relativity are not just because some dont understand, its because they do and GR presently does not make sence/logic etc. in the real universe; it leads to too many mysteries-inventions-necessities etc.

 

Snell's theory addresses it all, and supplies the answers, scientifically.

 

The questions by many have been posed, now the answers (Snell's Theory) has been supplied; its all for a reason, if you care to reason.

 

Peace

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.