PUBLICATIONS BY THE KARAVASHKINS ON CRITICISM OF RELATIVIST THEORY
S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina
Basing on the analysis of theoretical construction and experimental results, this paper shows that Mach's debunking the Newtonian "Absolute" originated the new Einsteinian "absolute" in the form of Minkowski 4D space-time metric which has caused only the primitivism in physics and
impeded its development.
In fact, relation between the Absolute and Relative is determined by the permanently moving edge of our knowledge and necessity in some basic reference frame which would allow us to generalise in the utmost correct way our particular results of studying the physical phenomena. So at every stage of physics development, the concept of the absolute reference frame reflects the highest level of knowledge of the stage. At the today level it would be quite admissible to use, as an approach to the absolute reference system, some system related to the Ether in the surrounding us near space.
S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina
We compare the experimental characteristics of the near field of transversal dynamic acoustic and EM fields. Grounding on the comparison, we conclude that in both dynamic fields the near region is separated into three sub-regions having the salient features inherent in both fields.
We establish that in the near of both fields the delay phase does not vanish but depends in a complex way on the distance from the source. With it in the second region of the near field, where the wave propagation velocity is minimal, the value of delay phase exceeds the related value for the far field.
This analysis fully lifts the contradiction between the properties of gas-like Ether and those of transversal acoustic wave.
S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina
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 George 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
The basic argument of relativists is related to the simultaneity of events and ways to determine this simultaneity from the point of view of observers in mutually moving inertial reference systems. But the methods proposed by Einstein, in themselves, destroy the basis of SRT, which we intend to show in this appendix.
1. The Postulate of constancy of the speed of light in the relativistic concept contradicts the conclusions that follow from the application of this postulate to specific physical problems.
2. The method of clock synchronization, based on sending signals between mutually stationary clocks, can be used exclusively in the case of immobility of the reference system, but not in relation to another reference system, but in relation to the Ether as a light-bearing medium, which Einstein removed from his concept. If this condition is violated, it turns out that in the absence of a light-bearing Ether, all reference systems without exception must have an anisotropy of the speed of light, depending arbitrarily on which reference system will be compared. Moreover, if two or more comparisons are made simultaneously with different reference systems, then disparate values will be obtained for each case.
3. The results show that the anisotropy of the speed of light is caused not by the reduction of the rod itself or the space-time metric, but by the peculiarities of the motion of the reference system.
S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina
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
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 Ether as a material substance, and if we try to return the Ether 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.
The results of the authors analysis show the fallacy of relativistic interpretations of the physical laws of light propagation in space and the concept of equivalence of inertial reference systems, which leads to a complete incorrectness of their own concept as a whole, which generates nothing but contradictions and absurd consequences and conclusions.
S. B. Karavashkin and O. N. Karavashkina
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.
About one important error in the interpretation of the results of the Michelson-Morley and Miller experiments. No one paid attention to the fact that in the Michelson scheme, repeated by many researchers, there was also a second effect – full-turn. It consisted in the fact that the device, being on the rotating Earth, during the rotation slightly changed its orientation relative to its movement around the Sun. As a result, the interference bands did not return to their original position during the revolution, and the graphs had a specific anomalous appearance.
A critical analysis of the organization of very interesting experiments by Yu. M. Galaev on "Measuring the speed of the Ethereal wind and the kinematic viscosity of ether in the range of optical waves" is given.
Experiments to test the "Ethereal wind" hypothesis are very complex. They require a serious approach and careful analysis of the schemes in order to correctly assess the expected results and effectively plan to counteract the above factors that distort and often level the effect itself. A number of these factors are considered in this article.
In his first published report on the experiment, dated 1881, Michelson calculates the effect, bassuming that the rays in the arms of the device along and across the direction of the ethereal wind pass in both directions along the same paths, which is reflected in the calculation itself, and in the attached model of the experiment. In principle, such a simplified mathematical justification of the experiment with such a complex process of identifying the ethereal wind in the conditions of relatively low Earth speed and completely unexplored properties of the light-carrying substance, could not give positive results, except that a rare piece of luck would smile. But this did not happen. Michelson realized his inaccuracy in the calculations and in the next report in 1887 tried to take into account the movement of the source. But Michelson did not pay attention to the fact that the motion of the device relative to a fixed reference system, the visible (imaginary) ray also will not go at an angle, and will spread in the same direction as in the companion device frame of reference, i.e., perpendicular to the first beam, but the speed of this visible beam is will depend on the speed of the device relative to light-bearing substance and to be unstable when rotating the device, unlike the
true speed of the beam propagating obliquely, as shown in the diagram. Although, on the other hand, when it is now known about the violation of the law of reflection for the imaginary beam when the calculated first scheme, it can be noted that estimating the model on the true rays are the least error-prone, because they strictly adhered to the laws of reflection and refraction, and the constancy of the speed and independence of motion of the source.
In a number of other experiments, when controlling the speed of light propagation, it is necessary to take into account the effects of light passing through an inhomogeneous medium.
The authors consider a number of fundamentally important controversial issues on SRT. A number of inconsistencies in classical explanations of SRT effects are shown.
The problems of creating a correct scheme of an experimental installation to test the hypothesis of the existence of an "Ethereal wind" and the original new design of the device, invented by the author, are considered. The article presents the implementation of the author's design and preliminary results of experiments on measuring the speed of the "Ethereal wind" with its help.
At the end of the 19th century, when the foundations of quantum mechanics were being laid, many scientists worked to get away from classical mechanics in explaining physical processes. The authors analyzed the direction in which quantum mechanics went with subsequent relativistic branches, since it claimed the right to be called wave mechanics, stating that classical mechanics is unable to meet the requirements of describing the physics of processes in the microcosm.
It is shown that if we talk about the atom (in the context of effects associated with spectral lines), then, first of all, when modeling, we need to take into account the delay time of transmission of effects in the system, due to the small size of the system and the high frequency of processes in it. It is also necessary to take into account the dynamic field of the nucleus and electrons, due to the high speeds of the latter. Finally, we must take into account that the electrons, attracted to the nucleus, repel each other. This dramatically changes the simulation compared to processes in the gravitational field, as it makes it impossible for some Kepler orbits to describe these processes. Without taking all this into account, without writing down the modeling equations in a form that would reflect real processes, it is incorrect to declare the inability of classical mechanics, which was used to initially describe real wave processes and vibrations, the formulas of which are selectively and unlawfully tried to use in quantum mechanics, violating the conditions described by them. At the same time, there are no problems in classical mechanics described by proponents of quantum mechanics when modeling is not limited to the narrow framework of the stationary Kepler problem, on the basis of which they try to write down ersatz wave solutions, which are simply not there according to the laws of classical mechanics themselves.
In our previous work "On the curvature of space-time", a model of interaction of gravitational bodies in their joint antiphase motion along a certain circle was considered. It was shown that due to the finiteness of the speed of propagation of the interaction in space, the interaction itself becomes non-Central. There is a projection of this force in the direction of movement of bodies, compensating for the loss of energy to radiation and stabilizing the rotation process.
In this paper, a model of the opposite non-central motion of two gravitating bodies is considered. It is shown that the counter motion of gravitational bodies leads to the emergence of a moment of tangential forces, which contributes to the formation of a vortex-like structure. Similar processes occur with the mutual movement of electric charges, which is similar in shape to the resulting structures of the macro-and micro-worlds.
As you know, the idea of time transformation originally came from Lorenz, who in the pursuit of mathematical sophistication misunderstood the idea voiced by Fitzgerald in one of his lectures, and for assigning this misunderstood idea to Lorenz had to apologize and make inserts in his work. Fitzgerald's original idea was that in order for light from a moving source to propagate vertically, the source itself must be tilted along the course of movement at a well-defined angle. In this case, the beam actually passes a greater distance to the receiver and, of course, spends more time on this. This is where the famous formulas that were transformed by Lorentz into transformations of reference systems came from. With the help of first Lorentz, then Poincaré with his invariants, and finally Einstein with his postulates, these formulas were completely emasculated and began to be interpreted as a reduction of space and time in a mobile frame of reference.
In a series of articles devoted to the study of dynamic fields of moving sources, the author has shown that due to this movement, the forces of interaction between the sources of the field lose their strict potentiality. As a result, a dynamic field is formed, forcing the sources to move relative to each other in closed orbits. However, it is clear that the completeness of correctness of the build, although ensures to a large extent the reliability of the test build, however, requires the visibility of the build results that will allow us to Refine and develop the study, deepening his experimental results. These results were recently presented to NASA in a report on observations of binary gravitational systems.
When studying options for describing the nature of the shift in the frequency of radiation of astronomical objects in the direction of the red region of the spectrum in the work "On the nature of metagalactic redshift", the author found that neither the Doppler effect, nor the aging of photons, nor relativistic effects are unable to describe the manifestation of this effect to the required extent. As an alternative to the existing concepts, the author considers the influence of the known radioluminescence effect, which consists in the fact that when gas atoms are irradiated in the space of the Universe, re-radiation occurs with a lower frequency, and the frequency difference is emitted in the range of radio waves.
Recognizing the absence of the covariance of gravitational processes, Einstein wanted to achieve this covariance by force for the sake of his own idea to represent the gravitational field as a metric of space. If we proceed from the principle of independence of light propagation from the
nature of the source movement, then we automatically need to recognize the difference in the pictures of equifase surfaces depending on whether we see the source movement or the source itself moves relative to the light-bearing substance, and there is no place for equivalence of reference systems, since this violates the laws of optics, the laws of interaction of fields that will manifest at significant speeds, and are already manifested in GPS resonators in Earth orbit. It is the attachment of light to its substance that makes pictures unequivalent and manifests itself in the very properties of light. The existence of a light-bearing substance is the root cause of this property, without which there is no constancy of speed. It is impossible to replace this with the maximum speed of light propagation.
In the case of mass equivalence, Einstein did not introduce equivalence itself, but postulated the possibility of replacing the free fall of a body in a gravitational field with its accelerated motion, which in itself is absurd from the point of view of classical physics, since the gravitational field refers to the field of mass forces in which this force acts on every elementary mass of this body. The force that provides accelerated movement is contact, i.e. it acts on the contact zone of the body with the source of force. Combining different types of forces is equivalent to replacing a force vector with a spatial one, also implemented by relativists in General relativity.
Various models show that the inert mass in dynamics does not remain constant and depends on the frequency, which does not allow us to generalize the equivalence of masses as a universal law. On the other hand, given that all gravitational bodies without exception are dynamical systems consisting of certain lattices of atoms, it is also not possible to talk about the equivalence of inert and gravitational masses in general, except for statics or stationary motion, i.e. when dynamics is not manifested.
If the relativistic concept based on the General Theory of Relativity opposed to the Newtonian, it would have to not explain the difference, and the displacement of the perihelion of mercury, since it is based not directly on Newton's law and their own equation of the curvature of space-time, which would affect not only additive, but the significance of perihelion shift. In fact,
this is far from the case.
Based on the consideration of complex lag, the author found that the divergence of the planet's velocity in relation to the balance of gravitational and centrifugal forces leads to precession of the orbit, and the joint movement of the Sun and mercury leads to the inclination of the plane of mercury's orbit in relation to the plane of the Ecliptic. At significant joint speeds of the planet and the Sun, the plane of the orbit is disrupted and the period of rotation increases sharply.
Already at the end of the 19th century, classical physics clearly separated the geometric isotropy of space and the anisotropy of physical processes that occurred in this space at significant speeds. Relativists, by assigning the area of low speeds to classical physics and wrongly attributing to it the infinite speed of light, actually borrowed from classical physics its principle of equality of IRF, postulatively extending it to those speeds that classical physics forbade. It is precisely the substitution by relativists of a clear division between classical physics of space and physical processes in this space on the basis of a pseudo-kinematic approach that generates an abundance of paradoxes and inconsistencies in the relativistic concept.
Recognizing a certain IRF as at rest only because it is connected to its observer, we automatically make it at rest relative to the light-bearing substance, throwing out all the effects associated with movement relative to it. This is precisely what leads to the contradiction indicated by Einstein, when both IRF should be stationary relative to the substance. They should not be stationary just because someone wanted to give up the light-bearing substance. The effects are manifested not in a stripped-down kinematic examination, when the observer does not see, hear, or understand something, but in a complex dynamic study with a choice of those tools that precisely show the true essence of physical processes, and not the IRF itself.
After the autopsy the author of several articles of the fundamental problems of relativistic concepts, in particular the illegality of the inclination of the plane of time, incorrect determination of the stationary inertial reference system, impropriety postulates themselves, the question naturally arises about the correctness of the relativist ideas about the reduction of space-time. To understand this question, let's start by describing how relativists themselves derived this reduction based on Lorentz transformations.
The only conclusion that follows from the review is that the relativistic principle of relativity contradicts the foundations of classical algebra, since it violates the more/less condition laid down in the basic operators of the algebra. As a consequence, the laws are not applicable for operating a four-dimensional space and the Lorentz transform. This is compounded by the isolation of the imaginary unit of a complex variable formalism and the improper inclination of the plane of time, whereby the conversion translation is not the physical time in the physical as it is required by convert IRF to nowhere. In this case, the transformations themselves lose the basic function of solving problems in some IRF with the help of another IRF.
Rarely did anyone pay attention to what happens when waves are superimposed, reducing everything to a narrow list of dogmatically quoted interference laws and descriptions of standing waves. The vast majority were satisfied with the fact that wave processes are characterized by the principle of superposition and after crossing the waves continue to propagate in the original directions. Yes, it is true. Nevertheless, the study of the area of the intersection itself is fraught with many nuances that can shed light on the conditions and nature of formations that proponents of etheric concepts often tend to attribute to vortices and that are formed in a local area with the potential to remain stable when the external fields stop working. This series of articles will cover a number of field structures for visualizing processes occurring in the region between dynamic field sources.
Despite the fact that since Michelson published the results of his first experiments in 1881, dozens of different experiments have been carried out, nevertheless, this experience remains basic to this day both in the justification and in the refutation of the relativistic concept. In the course of research by the author of the complete basic model of the Michelson interferometer, it was found that the estimates of the expected effect from previous simulations were significantly overestimated, as a result of not taking into account the displacements during the movement of all elements of the device relative to the ethereal wind. Also, the lack of dependence of the offset of the interference bands on the speed of the device relative to the ether made it impossible to explain the full-turn effect, due, as the study showed, to a change in the projection of the ethereal wind on the interferometer plane. This study opens the way to understanding and correctly accounting for the processes that need to be taken into account when planning and conducting further experiments on the study of the ethereal wind.
In the previous work, a complete simulation of the standard scheme of a two-beam interferometer was performed based on a technique that involves calculating the change in the phase difference of rays coming to a specific (central) point of the screen, depending on the orientation of
the device in relation to the ethereal wind. It was shown that for quadratic dependence (v/c) and Miller estimate the value of the velocity of the ether wind near the Earth at 2-8km/s, the offset values of the bands are consistent with the results of the experiment are too small for reliable registration of the phenomenon and, moreover, to estimate this speed. A number of researchers have tried to implement linear dependence, but the accuracy that can be achieved by interference methods cannot be provided by other methods, which are usually based on one-way beam passage. In this paper, an attempt is made to model a scheme with a linear dependence, but preserving the advantages of the interference method based on the difference in the course of rays coming to the screen.
FIELD OF SYNCHRONOUSLY MOVING SOURCES (S. B. Karavashkin, in Russian)
The question of dynamic fields is usually and quite naturally associated with wave processes. Everything would be normal if the transition from stationary to dynamic processes was carried out taking into account the features of the dynamic processes themselves, which are fundamentally different from statics, although in the extreme case they are reduced to the laws of static processes. When developing quantum mechanics, instead of searching for patterns that determine the features of dynamic processes, theorists "have drawn" the wave function to the stationary Lagrangian, inventing uncertainty functions to justify this "action", the harmonic nature of which completely contradicts statistical processes in physics. The same thing happened in General Relativity with attempts to describe the dynamics of the gravitational field using an artificial tensor analog of the Poisson equation for static fields.
In this series of articles, the author examines in detail and justifies an alternative physical and
mathematical approach to explaining the effects of GRT and SRT.
The contradiction between the reality of the appearance of special properties of fields in dynamics and attempts to attribute dynamics to equations describing static and stationary processes, reducing everything to a virtual metric, is clearly shown in the question of gravitational waves. The reduction to the D'Alembert equation does not describe the physics of gravitational waves, since such physics was initially emasculated by substituting the physical process for the curvature of space with reference to the static Poisson equation. Therefore, the conclusion about the equality of the speed of propagation of gravitational and electromagnetic waves is also unfounded. When the developers of the LIGO project suddenly presented the forming gravitational wave in the form shown in figure 1, they simply demonstrated "borrowing" our results obtained in the framework of classical formalism, without reference to these results, since no tricks could have obtained this type of wave from the relativistic formula.
The calculation and modeling of the gravitational field of a pair of bodies will be based on the stationary mutual rotation of bodies in a circular orbit around the common center of gravity, assuming a balance of gravitational and centrifugal forces for each body. In this case, the potential will not be calculated, the dynamic diagrams of which were borrowed by the authors of LIGO without references, but the field strength, i.e. the force acting on the unit mass of the test body. This is all the more important because it is the field strength that affects the mass of the test body, and not the potential as such, which assumes only the performance of work, but does not describe the process of performing work itself. The study revealed that:
– the total strength of the external gravitational field of mutually rotating masses is the fluctuations of the stress vectors relative to the direction to the center of mass of the given mass system;
– the gravitational wave in the external region is the result of synchronous rotation of the dynamic field component strengths at each point with the formation of a common spiral wave;
– the amplitude of this wave in the external region of the system of bodies does not exceed the second order of the average amplitude of the gravitational field of this system;
– the longitudinal and transverse components of a gravitational wave can be described by a power function, and at significant distances from the field source, both have attenuation proportional to the first power of the distance from the field source;
– the frequency of change of the dynamic field is doubled in relation to the frequency of mutual rotation of the gravitational masses that are the sources of this field.