|| Home. | Universe Galaxies And Stars Archives. | |
|| Universe | Big Bang | Galaxies | Stars | Solar System | Planets | Hubble Telescope | NASA | Search Engine ||
Relativity. Page 1 of 9.
Was Albert Einstein the famous German physicist really so drastically wrong about special relativity, the laws of physics, c the constant and the velocity of light, when he suggested all motion is relative, and the velocity of light has a constant speed, measured at 186,000 miles per second in a vacuum and represented mathematically as a (c)?
And if Einstein did have it wrong, could special relativity, and the laws of physics as we understand them be a monumental mistake? Could Einstein's work really have lead us up a blind alley for nearly a hundred years? Personally, I believe it could well have done. I truly think we can conclusively show special relativity to be wrong, on universal terms, if we change the initial point where light first originates.
Rather than say light emits from a star, we say it emits from a point of force central to any two stars and travels to both stars equally and proportionately in the same amount of time. Thus it would make it impossible for any two observers around the two stars to identify a time any different from the other, regardless of their distance of position in space.
Simply by changing the point where light first originates, I soon realised we could remove universal time, space time, spacetime curvature, forth dimensional spacetime - and of course, the Hubble constant.
At first the claim seemed outrageous, heresy even, to even suggest that the velocity of light might be broken, that the great man, Einstein might have it wrong and the velocity of light may reach any accelerated speed imaginable and alloy us to one day cross the universe to distant worlds as those who inhabit such worlds surely cross the trackless voids of space the other way to visit us. Those who come here to survey our beautiful world. But then, as disbelief turned to intrigue, my mind filled with highly original thought. I was desperate to move our limited thinking forwards, to push at the boundaries of reason and see if I couldn't confound the critics and show definitive proff that special relativity, on universal terms, to be no more than hokum. I couldn't help but wonder if there was more to the boast than met the eye? Maybe it would be possible to breech the velocity of light after all and make travelling to the stars beyond the speed of light a real possibility, rather than just science-fiction fantasy elegantly displayed on our TV and our movie screens. But first things first.
No one can fail to comprehed the axioms of Einsteinian physics, special relativity in particular, and not be amazed by the finite nature of Einstein's
work. Ever since special relativity's inception in 1905, and its acceptance into the realm of modern cosmology, science has marvelled at the sheer beauty of such a profound piece of postulation. Perhaps some have marvelled too much. Perhaps like a man looking at a beautiful woman they have failed to see the flaws, recognise the obvious and put aside their doubts. When you get passed the hype, the fact certain academics like to associate with Einsteinian physics, in a kind of reaching out to touch the king scenario, in the vein hope some of the glory m,ight rub off on them, we're left with some pretty dubious work. Fundamental among this is the fact special relativity is measured from here on earth, and fails to take account of any universal arbitration. Like the proverbial beautiful woman, it doesn't look quite so attractive without make~up. However , with little or nothing to replace or challenge special relativity, the flirtation has somewhat continued, unchallanged, unabated. Then along comes this.
Go To Print Article
Universe - Galaxies and Stars: Links and Contacts
|| GNU License | Contact | Copyright | WebMaster | Terms | Disclaimer | Top Of Page. ||