HISTORY AND CRITICISM OF THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY

A. A. Тyapkin

(link to article in English : http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1070/PU1972v015n02ABEH004964/pdf)

Historical references concerning the establishment of the conventional character of the concept of simultaneity of spatially separated events are cited in the article. It is shown that when the criteria for simultaneity admissible on the basis of cause-effect relations have been chosen, there appear in the general case anisotropic descriptions of the velocities of physical processes, which, owing to kinematic similitude, are impossible to distinguish from the isotropic description.

It is noted that the theory constructed by Lorentz in his 1904 paper is essentially one of possible forms of presentation of the theory of relativity. The attempts to "develop" Lorentz's erroneous explanation of the relativistic effects are reviewed. The special theory of relativity is analyzed with allowance for the conventionality of the individual propositions of the traditional form of presentation of the theory.

A preliminary analysis of the kinematics of physical phenomena for different reference frames in common space-time scales enabled us to establish the fact that the relativity principle is satisfied, owing to the appearance of a kinematic similitude for the corresponding processes, which proceed differently in different inertial coordinate systems. It is shown that the characteristics of the Lorentz transformations lie in just an expression for a universal difference between the velocities of propagation of physical processes in the direction of relative motion of the reference frames. The necessity of the universality requirement for the properties of motion, expressed in terms of the metric properties of space-time, is especially emphasized in the paper, and attention is drawn to a possible use of the old data on the metric of the physical space-time to uncover new properties of motion.

B.B. Kadomtsev, L.V. Keldysh, I.Yu. Kobzarev, R.Z. Sagdeev

ABOUT A. A. TYAPKIN’S PAPER: « EXPRESSION OF THE GENERAL PROPERTIES OF PHYSICAL PROCESSES IN THE SPACE-TIME METRIC OF THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY» (1972) (in Russian)

(link to article in English : http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1070/PU1972v015n02ABEH004965/pdf)

We must not forget that for Lorentz and Poincaré it was about the theory of electrons, immersed in the aether, and a selected coordinate system in which the aether was immobile. The condition of relativity for them was a result of a compensation, not allowing to detect any motion relative to the aether. Only Einstein renounced to aether in its work, considering all the inertial system as equal, and the Fitzgerald reduction as a relative effect that can occur in any inertial system. That is why Einstein is the author of the theory of relativity in the proper sense of the word.

The main allegation of A. Tyapkina is that you can deny the isotropy of the speed of light and accept another point of view, using the Galileo transformation instead of the Lorentz transformations. While this sacrifices the invariance of descriptions. Formally, mathematically, it is possible, as it is possible to use an oblique coordinate system instead of a Cartesian one. However, from the point of view of physics, the loss of simplicity of mathematical theory, the abandonment of the group properties of Lorentz transformations, and thereby sacrificing an adequate description of the symmetry properties of space-time, do complicate the picture so much, that the language of the theory cannot be considered suitable for practical use.

It is well known that not only the Michelson experience can be described in arbitrary coordinates, but also the general relativity can be formulated in arbitrary, non-Cartesian coordinates in the four-dimensional space-time, as it is done, for example, in V. Fock’s book "Theory of Space, Time and Gravitation".

In particular, a description using the Galilean coordinates has been done in the book of C. Moller, "Theory of Relativity". It must be emphasized, however, that in order to fully articulate the special theory of relativity in the Galilean coordinates, one must explicitly enter the metric tensor equation, because the interval in these coordinates has a non-Descartes form:

ds2 = (с2 ‑ ʋ2) dt2 ‑ ʋdx'dt ‑ dx2 ‑ dy2 ‑ dz2.

The author did’t do it, only describing the Michelson experiment in Galilean coordinates. As a result, in his article on special relativity, nor the theory of relativity, neither the principle of relativity have been formulated mathematically.

To summarize, we must say that the article of A. Tyapkin, contrary to the author’s declaration, contains no new ideas, which haven’t been discussed previously. With regard to the interpretation of the question proposed by A. Tyapkin, it is incomplete and only bulkier dims the physical meaning of the considered ratios.

A. A. Тyapkin

PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY. DIGEST OF WORKS AON STR (1973) (pdf, in Russian)

A. A. Тyapkin

HISTORY OF FORMATION OF STR’s IDEAS (PART OF THE DIGEST ABOVE) (1973) (in Russian)

A. A. Тyapkin

HISTORY OF OCCURRENCE OF THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY (2004) (in Russian)

I.Yu. Kobzarev

Speaking of Einstein as the creator of the theory of relativity, it is usually meant that in his work, decisive steps have been made: it has been shown that all inertial systems are equal, the coordinates and times measured in these formulas involve relativistic transformations (mathematically identical to formulas of Lorentz), times and lengths are relative; equation of optics and electrodynamics have the same form in all inertial frames of reference.

Only Einstein realized that relativistic effects are relative, that the notion of aether was not necessary, and this was the revolutionary significance of his work. It should also be remembered that only in Einstein's work, the relativity theory appeared as a "theory", in the classic sense of the word (a system of affirmations, logically build on a few clear postulates). Thus, the creator of the theory of relativity in the proper sense of the word is, undoubtedly, Einstein.

V. N. Leonovich

THE OTHER SIDE OF EINSTEIN’S THEORY OF RELATIVITY, OR THE DRIVING FORCES OF A BIG AFFAIR’S PHENOMENAL SUCCESS (2014) (in Russian)

B.M. Moiseev

ONCE MORE ABOUT THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY (2014) (pdf, in Russian)

This report once again draws attention to the problems, which appear in physics, if the special theory of relativity is recognized. In addition, the necessity of not stopping scientific criticism of this theory is substantiated.

O. Akimov

CRITIC OF THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY (pdf, in Russian)

O. Akimov

THE MISTAKE IN THE RELATIVISTIC FORMULA OF DOPPLER (2016) (in Russian)

In this article, we analyze the phenomenon known as “Doppler effect”, and see how the Doppler formulas coexist for classical and relativistic physics.

S. N. Arteha

CRITICISM OF THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE RELATIVITY THEORY (2004) (pdf, in Russian)

The present book is devoted to systematic criticism of the fundamentals of the relativity theory (RT). The main attention is given to the new logical contradictions of RT, since presence of such contradictions brings "to zero" the value of any theory. Many disputable and contradictory points of this theory and its corollaries are considered in detail in the book. The lack of logical and physical grounding for fundamental concepts in the special and general relativity theory, such as time, space, the relativity of simultaneity etc., is demonstrated. A critical analysis of experiments that resulted in the generation and establishment of relativity theory is presented in the book. The detailed criticism of dynamical SRT concepts is also given in the book. The inconsistency and groundlessness in a seemingly "working" section of the relativity theory - the relativistic dynamics - is shown.

S. N. Arteha

CRITICISM OF SOME ASPECTS OF THE RELATIVITY THEORY (2007) (IN RUSSIAN) (pdf, in Russian)

The paper is devoted to the critical analysis of some positions of the special relativity theory (SRT) and to the questions connected with this subject. Significant attention is given to logic contradictions of the SRT.

S. N. Arteha

A SHORT STANDARD-MINIMUM CRITIC OF THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY (in Russian)

Section of articles in Russian, by authors:

V. А. Kuligin, G. А. Kuligina, М. V. Korneva

SERIE OF PUBLICATIONS WITH CRITICS OF THE THEORY OF RELATIVITY

CRISIS OF THE RELATIVISTIC THEORY (2001)

NEW EXPLANATION OF THE RELATIVISTIC PHENOMENA (2003)

REVISION OF THEORETICAL BASIS OF RELATIVISTIC ELECTRODYNAMICS (2004)

ANALYSIS OF CLASSICAL ELECTRODYNBAMICS AND OF THEORY OF RELATIVITY (2008)

THE MATHEMATICAL MISTAKES WHICH DISTORTED PHYSICS (2008)

THE PROBLEMS, FALLACIES AND MISTAKES IN ELECTRODYNAMICS, PART 1. (2011)

THE PROBLEMS, FALLACIES AND MISTAKES IN ELECTRODYNAMICS, PART 2. (2011)

THE PROBLEMS, FALLACIES AND MISTAKES IN ELECTRODYNAMICS, PART 3. (2011)

THE PROBLEMS, FALLACIES AND MISTAKES IN ELECTRODYNAMICS, PART 4 (2011) (pdf)

THE MISTAKE OF MAXWELL AND ITS CONSEQUENCES FOR PHYSICS (2015)

THE NON CORRECTED MISTAKE OF POINCARE AND ANALYSIS OF THE SRT (2015)

Section of articles in English, by authors:

S.B. Karavashkin and O.N. Karavashkina

ELECTRONIC JOURNAL ON PHYSICS «SELF Transactions»

ARCHIVE OF ELECTRONIC JOURNAL ON PHYSICS «SELF Transactions»

S.B.Karavashkin and O.N.Karavashkina

ON BASIC FORMALISM OF SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY (2005)

We will study Lorentz transformation for speeds and accelerations, how do they satisfy the self-consistence of the group of metamorphisms and whether it is legal to join formally the concepts of invariant and 4-D interval. In these frames we will check, whether there are conserved the regularities of accelerated motion in inertial reference frames, the law of vectors addition and reality of relativistic reduction of bodies, and whether it is legal to study the non-uniform motion of bodies with respect to their intrinsic frames. Basing on this analysis, we conclude that the formalism of special theory of relativity is unable to solve the kinematic and dynamic problems of bodies.

S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina

We will study astronomical aberration of light from the view of classical and relativistic formalisms and reveal the following salient feature of aberration in classical formalism: the models of moving observer and stationary source and of moving source and stationary observer are non-identical. As opposite to this, the relativistic formalism has based its modelling on the identity of these models, which causes full phenomenological discrepancy of relativistic approach to the real description of aberration.

We will show that Airy obtained a negative result in his experiment with the telescope filled with water because of features of telescopic system, which he did not account. If getting these masking effects over, we can suggest a method to measure exactly the absolute velocity and direction of the Earth motion based on the feature of aberration predicted by classical formalism. Additionally, we will give one more scheme to register the velocity of Earth. This technique will allow to measure, just as the technique based on aberration, the first-order values of smallness in v/c.

S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina

ON REALITY OF BLACK HOLES (2005)

We will analyse the basic phenomenological and mathematical approaches of Relativity when having built the General theory of relativity. We will show full inconsistency of the statements of problems to the corresponding processes in real physical systems, artificial mathematical transformations based on ignoring the logic sequence of formal mathematical derivation, on unfoundedly introduced ad libitum, doubtful postulates and on arbitrarily composed mathematical expressions.

S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina

ON CORRECTNESS OF BASIC POSTULATES OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY (2006)

We will study the basic postulates of special theory of relativity: the postulate of constant speed of light in all reference frames (L-postulate) and the postulate of relativity. We will show impossible to introduce the L-postulate out of denying the aether as a material substance, and if we try to return the aether to SR without complete revision of the basis of this conception, of L-postulate in that number, this will cause the discrepancies in SR as the whole.

S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina

THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL TIME IN TODAY PHYSICS (2006)

In our previous papers devoted to different aspects of the theory of relativity and quantum theory we showed gross mistakes of these theories that make them groundless. So we have revealed: as today theoretical physics rejected the robust classical approaches, it has no reliable basis with which the scientists would be able to study correctly. This work builds a bridge of understanding for colleagues educated on the clearly idealistic relativistic and quantum conceptions, returning to the correct basic concepts of absolute and relative in the philosophy of physics – time, space, place, motion, acceleration, forces, correlation of moving reference frames.

Section of articles in Russian, by authors:

V. V. Petrov

SERIE OF PUBLICATIONS WITH CRITICS OF THE RELATIVISTIC THEORY

EXPERIMENTS OF EICHENWALD AND WILSON (2001)

EXPERIMENTS OF ARAGO AND THEORY OF FRESNEL (2001)

EXPERIMENTS OF MICHELSON-MORLEY AND HYPOTHESIS OF FRESNEL (2001)

EXPERIMENTS OF SAGNAC, MICHELSON-GALE, MILLER (2002)

PHENOMENA LINKED TO THE EARTH MOTION RELATIVELY TO THE AETHER (2002)

«RELATIVISTIC» AUGMENTATION OF MASS FOR MOVING BODIES (2002)

«RELATIVISTIC» TIME DILATION AND RELATIVE SIMULTANEITY (2002)

USE OF LASER IN THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT (2003)

ABOUT THE MOTION OF THE PERPENDICULAR RAY IN THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT (2008)

Section of articles in Russian, by authors:

A. K. Yukhimed

OPEN LETTER TO THE ACADEMICIAN E.B. ALEXANDROV (2003)

WHAT SHOULD BE THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SRT (2004)

CALCULATION OF PRECESSION IN THE ORBIT OF MERCURY WITHOUT GRT (2009)

PHYSICAL MEANING OF THE SRT (2009)

PRINCIPLE OF CONSTANCY OF LIGHT OF SPEED, AND ITS ROLE IN THE SRT (2010)

LOGICAL CONTRADICTIONS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SRT BY EINSTEIN (2010)

THE LORENTZ TRANSFORMATIONS IN THE SRT (2011)

SPACE-TIME IN THE SRT AND REAL MEANING OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY (2011)

THE ABSOLUTE COORDINATE SYSTEM AND PRINCIPLE OF CONSTANCY OF THE VELOCITY OF LIGHT IN IT (2011)

It is shown what needs to be understood by theoretically conceivable absolute reference system (ASO) in special relativity (SR). Only in such a system, we can formulate in a consistent way the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light as a postulate of some constant value, inherent to the very nature of light propagation as an electromagnetic wave process in a real physical space. It flows at a constant velocity in all directions from the radiation source of the light pulse, in a real physical space, regardless of the speed of the source, and is not affected by anything more.

MY EXPLANATIONS ABOUT THE SRT (2016) (pdf)

Section of articles in Russian, by authors:

L. G. KREYDIK

MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENTS AND THEORY OF RELATIVITY

EXPERIMENTS OF KAUFMANN AND INDEPENDENCE OF EXCHANGE OF MASS FROM VELOCITY

RELATION BETWEEN SYSTEMS OF COORDINATES AND DOPPLER EFFECT

ANALYSIS OF THE «SIMPLE CONCLUSION OF LORENTZ TRANSFORMATION », PROPOSED BY EINSTEIN

ANALYSIS OF THE « CONCLUSION OF LORENTZ TRANSFORMATION » IN HIGH SCHOOL

THE MINKOWSKI-EINSTEIN SPACE AND THE REAL MULTIDIMENSIONAL WORLD

THE « AETHER CATECHISM » (CRITIC OF SRT AND GRT, BIBLIOTHEQUE OF AETHER THEORIES) (in Russian)

EXPERIMENTAL TESTS INVALIDATING EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

In the web pages below, we present explanations which are compatible with Newtonian and semi-classical physics. We apply the principle of causality and avoid models requiring a probabilistic existence of matter and non-locality. This differs from the current approach of modern physics.