Einstein and Relativiy in the Electric Universe

Has science taken a wrong turn? If so, what corrections are needed? Chronicles of scientific misbehavior. The role of heretic-pioneers and forbidden questions in the sciences. Is peer review working? The perverse "consensus of leading scientists." Good public relations versus good science.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: Einstein and Relativiy in the Electric Universe

Unread postby silvanelf » Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:48 am

Zyxzevn wrote:Sadly many scientists do not know that there are simpler alternatives to special relativity that can work just fine.

Aether

There are some members of the EU that like the idea of some kind of "Dynamic Aether".
It defines Aether as a substance that moves relative with gravity.
Which means that all current relativity experiments work as well.

Afaik only a few aether theories have been worked out in sufficient details, meaning a consistent mathematical theory. I'm aware of the Einstein-aether theory of Jacobson / Mattingly, but I haven't studied it in detail.
Einstein æther theory, also called æ-theory, is a generally covariant modification of general relativity which describes a spacetime endowed with both a metric and a unit timelike vector field named the æther. The theory has a preferred reference frame and hence violates Lorentz invariance.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_aether_theory

"Some kind of dynamic aether" sounds more like a vague idea than an elaborate physical theory.

The task of transforming special relativity (SR) into a preferred frame theory consistent with special relativity has been achieved, see the Chang-Tangherlini transformation as an equivalent to the Lorentz transformation. Furthermore a reformulation of electrodynamics with regard to an unspecified aether has also been done, it is sometimes called Hertzian electrodynamics. it is closely related to the question of electrodynamics in a moving medium.

But I'm not sure if it is justified to say that these theories are "simpler alternatives to special relativity" -- they look much more complex.
silvanelf
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Einstein and Relativiy in the Electric Universe

Unread postby silvanelf » Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:57 am

Roshi wrote:Everything in the Universe happens in one absolute order. Events do not happen before, and after other events at the same time, it does not matter if there is an observer or not.

The standard interpretation of special relativity defines only a partial ordering of events, but there is no absolute order. You have to look at the past and future lightcones of an observer, they define which events can be causally related to the observer.
silvanelf
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 12:52 pm

Re: Einstein and Relativiy in the Electric Universe

Unread postby Roshi » Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:20 am

silvanelf wrote:
Roshi wrote:Everything in the Universe happens in one absolute order. Events do not happen before, and after other events at the same time, it does not matter if there is an observer or not.

The standard interpretation of special relativity defines only a partial ordering of events, but there is no absolute order. You have to look at the past and future lightcones of an observer, they define which events can be causally related to the observer.

What does the observer being able to cause an event or not - has to do with the absolute order of the events? Even if there is no observer there is absolute order.

If you look from a good vantage point, 2 events always have an order. And if someone else, that is nearer to one event sees that one happening first, this does not change the order of events. If in the middle ages someone got some news - 1 month later, it does not change anything about what happened and the order in wich it happened.

If I witness an event, and someone else gets the news (or sees it later because he is far away), it does not mean that the event happened at 2 different times, or before and after (at the same time) another event because someone else saw something else...

And if we have multiple events and multiple observers, suddenly there is no order anymore because everyone witnesess the event nearer to him first. And if they start using this as a measure of the real order in which the events happened we can throw away all physics.

What can you say to a person that says "Titanic sunk this afternoon and Hiroshima happened 30 years ago, because that's when I read about it"? Don't really know if it's worth talking to such a person...

Don't know why I bother anymore, I argued enough about relativity, who is interested can search for himself. You can start here:
http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/ ... llenge.htm
Roshi
 
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:35 am

Re: Einstein and Relativiy in the Electric Universe

Unread postby silvanelf » Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:44 pm

Roshi wrote:Don't know why I bother anymore, I argued enough about relativity, who is interested can search for himself. You can start here:
http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/ ... llenge.htm

You are missing the point. It seems obvious to me that you never tried to understand the "Relativity of Simultaneity" -- see here:
https://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Special_relativity_rel_sim/index.html
silvanelf
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 12:52 pm

Previous

Return to The Future of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests