Theory Of Relativity - Hoax Of the XX Century

The second postulate of the theory of relativity - c = const is refuted by observations and experiments. Therefore, relativistic mechanics has nothing to do with the description of the real world. The theory of relativity, special and general, is the result of uncritical imagination, incompetence and outright deceit, a scientific pile in which there is no pearl grain, there is nothing to dig into and look for any meaning in it.

This is a collection of fantastic inventions and logical manipulations. The theory can be used as a kind of test for the readers' common sense and resistance to suggestibility, but it is better to push it further. And the problems, supposedly described by relativistic mechanics, must be rethought and their solutions must be found. First of all, to study and understand the nature of electromagnetic radiation, which is an essential part of the universe.

***
Review of V.I.Sekerin's  THEORY OF RELATIVITY - HOAX OF THE XX CENTURY

The work of V.I. Sekerin "Essay on the theory of relativity", about 2.75 author's pages, is devoted to criticism of the basic postulates of the theory of relativity of A. Einstein. It consistently sets out well-known and little-known to the general public, experimental facts that fundamentally contradict the principle of constancy of the speed of light. Specifically, these are: 1. Römer's experiments on observing eclipses of Jupiter's satellites. 2. Annual aberrations of stars caused by the addition of the speed of light and the speed of the Earth in its orbit. 3. Ritz's construction for binary stars, which, brought by the author to a direct calculation, unambiguously describes the course of brightness and their spectral properties for a wide class of binaries. 4. Experiments on the radar of Venus, the analysis of which was carried out by the American astronomer B. Wallace in 1961-1966, and in which the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory of the Academy of Sciences also took part.

All these experiments, without any doubt, contradict the theory of relativity. Among them, the most interesting are the annual stellar aberration and the radar of Venus. If, from the point of view of the practice of science, corrections for aberration were introduced and will always be introduced by any astronomer measuring the positions of the stars, while not at all worrying about the discomfort of the Einsteinians (practice requires accuracy, not worship of authorities), then in the case of radar of Venus, once again which confirmed that the speed of the source (relative to the observer on Earth) and the speed of the electromagnetic wave emitted by it are added (subtracted), ignoring this knowledge promises big trouble for scientists, astronauts and, especially, for the military in the near future.

Further, V.I.Sekerin has a set of examples demonstrating new possibilities in explaining various physical phenomena, without resorting to the postulate of the constancy of the speed of light. It is not all successful here in a purely didactic sense. There are rhetorically vulnerable spots, both in the author of the essay and in potential opponents.

The last, philosophical part of the work requires professional discussion, and we omit it. And, nevertheless, it is necessary to note the following, It has long been accepted in every self-respecting science that if in the constructed theory, system of evidence or experimental foundations, at least one fact appears that contradicts the previous laws, then the theory, system of evidence, the experimental foundations are rejected or radically revised.

And so, despite a wide range of experiments, where the constancy of the speed of light does not take place, Einstein's physics continues to live. Only the deeply rooted cult of Einstein's personality can explain this situation in physics.

As always, the cult creates a situation in which zones outside of criticism appear. In modern physics, any confirmation of the violation of the principle of constancy of the speed of light has become such a zone of silence. We are sure that a reasonable physicist perfectly feels the falsity in the presentation of his subject, but a cult with all the attributes of suppression of dissent and a repressive apparatus and methods - a doubting physicist (this is enough) immediately declares not a physicist with all the ensuing consequences for a scientist's career ... An active position in the criticism of the cult threatened quite recently with the announcement of the obstinate physicist mentally ill.

Cults must be broken. Any. Including the cult of Einstein. It is this circumstance that gives rise to the need to publish the polemical materials of V.I.Sekerin, designed to make a breakthrough into one of the closed zones of world science.

Serbulenko Mikhail Georgievich, candidate of physical and mathematical sciences, senior researcher Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Let us suppose that experiment has refuted the hypothesis of relativity (Einstein). How many labors were used by scientists to master it, how many students puzzled over it - and suddenly it turned out to be nonsense. And humiliating, and as if the treasure was lost.
How much pride there was in front of others, unfamiliar with the teaching - and everything collapsed. You have to bow your head and bitterly regret the time spent. Is it nice ?!
Old hypotheses are constantly rejected, and science is being improved. And scientists always prevent this most of all, because they lose and suffer the most from this alteration.
Average people are not hurt because they have not heard of these hypotheses. Of course, one must pity the scientists, but they themselves must beware and endure false humiliation for the sake of higher goals. To alleviate their suffering, special delicacy is needed.
K.E. Tsiolkovsky. A genius among people. M. "Thought", 2002.

Magi and real artists have the gift of providence. In the seeming chaos and confusion of life, they suddenly stop the attention of mankind on a seemingly insignificant detail, which acquires its true, key significance. Chaos disappears, the incomprehensible becomes clear.

Upon acquaintance with the painting by I. Glazunov "Mystery of the XX century", the fragment, which depicts the formula "2 x 2 = 5", the work of K. Malevich "Black Square" and the portrait of A. Einstein with his tongue sticking out, causes bewilderment. To the claims to the artist why he portrayed the popular physicist in such an unsightly way, Glazunov replied that he simply transferred the image of the scientist from a photograph to the canvas. As for the composition, this is his, the artist's, vision of the world of the 20th century.

Here another question arises: why did A. Einstein, being of old age and sane, not only photographed in this form, but also popularized this photograph in every possible way?
To get an answer, you need to understand the meaning of the picture as a whole. Glazunov's canvas captures the most outstanding hoaxes of the century, forming a common mystery, a deceptive theatrical performance of a world scale on the stage of life. Several hoaxes have found their place on the fragment being analyzed. In our opinion, they should be understood as follows.

The fine arts are valuable for their artistry, informational content, and the assertion of a realistic outlook. All this is present in “abundance” in K. Malevich's painting “Black Square”, called in some circles the “Manifesto of Abstractionism”. There is exactly the same amount of sanity in the formula "2 x 2 = 5". The answer to the portrait lies in the results of Einstein's activity, in his main work - the special and general theory of relativity.

(...)

Invention of the theory of relativity  Under the conditions described above, the invention of the theory of relativity was, to some extent, a natural act, but its appearance only aggravated the existing crisis. Here the word "invention" for the theory of relativity is not a reservation, but a statement that it was really invented, assembled entirely from the elements of the ether theory, only in a different order, like in a children's designer. There is not a single new element in it in comparison with its predecessor, there is not a single new discovery. This is well shown, for example, in the work "Einstein's Theory of Relativity" by Max Born, the author "who personally took an active part in the main scientific events of the first half of the twentieth century." The recommended book is voluminous, but the theories described in it can be schematically outlined rather briefly [15].

The essence of the ether theory. Experimental advances in the study of optical phenomena in the 19th century convinced the scientific world that light is waves of ether. But the experiment on detection of the ether wind, carried out in 1881 by A. Michelson, spoiled the harmonious picture. There was no ethereal wind, the speed of light in all directions relative to the source was the same. Many physicists could not accept the obvious conclusion from the named experiment: the ideas about the existence of the ether are false and one should return to the corpuscular ideas of I. Newton. They began to look for other reasons. To reconcile Michelson's experience and the ether existing in their imagination, some scientists presented fantastic, one might say, delusional thoughts.

In 1892 J. Fitzgerald suggested that bodies in motion, interacting with the ether, contract in the direction of their motion and the distortion of the device compensates for the undetectable motion relative to the ether. J. Larmor adhered to similar views. G. Lorentz acted most radically. Translating Fitzgerald's ideas into mathematical formulas in order to obtain a constant in magnitude the speed of light, he comes to the need to count not only the change in the size of bodies in a moving system, but also a change in the flow of time in proportion to the speed of the system relative to the ether. Let us emphasize especially that the change in the flow of time was found by Lorentz not as a result of experiments and observations, but by a school method in the course of mathematical adjustment of Michelson's experiments to etheric representations. The resulting mathematical equations later became known as Lorentz transformations. When calculating according to these equations, the speed of light always turns out to be the same, therefore, the movement relative to the ether cannot be fixed. This is how the experimental constancy of the speed of light was combined with an imaginary ether.

These ideas were supported and approved by the famous mathematician and philosopher A. Poincaré.

As an employee of the patent office, A. Einstein knew the rules for drafting applications, according to which he composed a new invention from elements of the borrowed. After many years of searching, the main "achievement" of the aetherists was the "explanation" of the constancy of the speed of light in Michelson's experiments. Einstein makes this “achievement” the basis of his theory, puts it as a postulate “... light in emptiness always propagates at a certain speed V, independent of the movement of the emitting body”, in which the connection with ethereal ideas is clearly visible: “… with a certain speed V, independent of the motion of the emitting body.” It is in the medium (ether) that the speed of wave propagation does not depend on the motion of the emitter. Only later, under the onslaught of questions, Einstein gave a different, expanded and somewhat different meaning, definition of the postulate as a self-evident property of nature without any justification: "The same light ray propagates in emptiness with speed "c" not only in the frame of reference K, but also in every other frame of reference K', moving uniformly and rectilinearly relative to K".

Using the announced postulate and ready-made mathematics - the Lorentz transformations, he gets that in systems moving relative to the observer, bodies contract, and time flows in a different way than in the observer's system. In his fundamental work, A. Einstein did not indicate a single previous work, from which he borrowed ideas and mathematics.

Typical "creative" plagiarist approach. In modern literature, this fact is constantly noted, but is considered by apologists no more than a prank of a genius.

The most inconvenient element of the ether theory was the proof of the existence of the ether itself. Ether in the ether theory manifests itself and exists only during the passage of waves through it. No waves, no ether. Therefore, in the new theory, it is declaratively excluded from consideration. However, light in the theory of relativity is considered as waves. A wave, by definition, is the propagation of a disturbance in a medium. Therefore, if there are waves, then there must be a medium, a carrier of waves. Yes, it seems so, but this is no longer ether, but, say, a vacuum. But vacuum is emptiness, nothing, there can be no waves in it.

Then - "physical vacuum", "physical field", or something like that, indefinite, called dualism. The main thing is that now it is not necessary to consider the physical characteristics of the light-carrying medium, it is not in theory, and to coordinate them with the parameters of the waves of the medium. Light, and with it all electromagnetic radiation, have become a kind of abstraction, devoid of any real, consistent properties: waves - without a medium, particles - without mass.

The result is a chimerical theory, similar to the ethereal one, but without ether. It contains all the developments of the ether theory, but its main element, the ether itself, is excluded, there are waves, but the medium, the carrier of waves, is not. What was a consequence of mathematical calculations in the ether theory - the constancy of the speed of light, as a result of changes in the size of bodies and time intervals, in the new theory is set as the cause. And the reason for the ether theory - the change in the size of bodies and time intervals, was a consequence of the constancy of the speed of light. What united both theories is that the predicted changes in the size of bodies, time intervals and mass are fundamentally undetectable, mystical. If in moving inertial systems time and distance change in accordance with the Lorentz transformations, then this applies not only to measured bodies and phenomena, but standard measures of length and control clocks.

Unlike the ethereal theory, in which even mythical causes and mechanisms of interaction of phenomena were considered, in the invented theory its predictions have neither reasons nor mechanism of changes, they cannot be confirmed or refuted by scientific methods.

Everything must be taken on faith. Instead of the obligatory concept - "I know", a new concept - "I believe" is introduced into science, which makes this problem similar to the scholastic task of the Middle Ages: how many devils can fit on the point of a needle?

Instead of returning to the views of Galileo-Newton while studying the nature of light and on this basis to develop physics further, as W. Ritz tried to do, Einstein introduced one of his own fictions - the postulate c = const, and all the other fictions of the Etherists based on the postulate logically tied one by one.

Perhaps the scientific community and the world would have survived such a metamorphosis calmly, and the theory of relativity, along with the ether theory, would have taken their rightful place in the list of curiosities in the history of science, if politics and politicians had not intervened in the development of events.

The world at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries 

“A very special atmosphere has been created around the theory of relativity. She defends herself with extraordinary passion, and her opponents are subjected to all kinds of attacks, from which it is clear that this is not at all about the details of some theory, but that here in this area the class struggle is reflected, the participants of which do not even realize that they participate in it. " A.K. Timiryazev. Introduction to theoretical physics. M., 1933.

According to its purpose, the theory of relativity began to perform some of the functions of religious and mystical doctrines losing their positions and, first of all, very successfully the function of discrediting common sense, perverting the methods of scientific knowledge. (What are the holy miracles, if, for example, science has "proven" that a twin flying under certain conditions on a space flight, after returning, can meet with a much older twin brother, or even with a son who has become older than his father). This theory took over from religion not only the structure of its construction, it is based on dogmatic postulates that contradict common sense and reality, but also methods of asserting its dominance: substitution of concepts, ruthless suppression of opponents. She also incorporated elements of religious mythology into her content: the creation of the world as a result of the Big Bang and, possibly, the end of the world due to scattering and dispersal.

The theory of relativity was formed gradually, therefore, scientists E. Mach, H. Poincaré, H. Lorentz and others [1], [19], who have done a lot of preparatory work, should be included in its team of authors. And although each of them strove to reveal the truth in natural science, in essence they worked for philosophical concepts that were contrary to common sense, in other words, for mysticism and idealism. (...)

In the nineteenth century ghosts roamed Europe, not only the ghost of communism, but also the ghost of Zionism. In the twentieth century, "ideas took possession of the masses", their confrontation began.

Communism has set itself the goal of building a paradise on Earth for all people on the planet - the elimination of the exploitation of man by man, racial and national inequality, the satisfaction of the material and cultural needs of society on the basis of a universal and equal obligation to work. The philosophical basis of communism was dialectical and historical materialism, based on the achievements of classical science, including physics. The key points of the philosophy of communism are the recognition of the materiality of the world, the primacy of matter and the secondary nature of consciousness, the acceptance of cause and effect relationships, the materialistic development of nature and human civilization, the denial of any religion.

Zionism also set the goal of creating a paradise on Earth, but in one country and only for one people - the Jews. The ideological basis of Zionism is Judaism, in which the main shrine is the "chosen by God" Jewish people. His chosenness of God in relations with other nations should ensure privileged well-being, not only moral, but also material.

Judaism, like any religion, is an idealistic teaching that recognizes the primacy of spirit and the secondary nature of matter.

Under the cover of advertising noise, one of the elements of which was Eddington's astronomical observations, the development of the situation around the theory of relativity and its author was given a new direction. “Until 1919, Einstein, who was then already forty years old, was engaged in ordinary scientific activities in close contact with a number of his - quite, by the way, his worthy colleagues and had equal fame with them. But in 1919 there was an unexpected and unheard-of explosion in Einstein's popularity, which can be learned from any of his life stories.

Einstein's change in status was truly incredible and startling. "This is what the memoirist K. Blumenfeld writes.“ Until 1919, Einstein had no connection with either Zionism or the Zionist way of thinking. In February 1919, our meeting took place, which revolutionized Einstein's attitude towards the Jewish people.

At this time, Felix Rosenblum (now Israel's Minister of Justice Pinchas Rosen, 1956) presented a list of Jewish scholars in whom we wanted to awaken an interest in Zionism. Einstein was among them.

Natural scientists have known for many years about the significance of this man, but when we visited him ... there was still no crowd of interviewers, photographers and curious people who besieged him in the future." (Quotes are taken from the article by Vadim Kozhinov: "N. Agursky's Zionism and International Zionism", "Our Contemporary", No. 6, 1990, p. 152. The latter is cited by the author of an article from the well-known collection "Light Time - Dark Time" (He11e Zeit - Dunkle Zeit. In Memoriof Albert Einstein. Europa Verlag, 1956, p. 74), expressing regret that this collection has not been published in our country. It should be added - it is a pity that there is no translation and publication in Russian of Einstein's book "Mine worldview" (Albert Einstein. Mein Weltbild Zveite Auflage Amsterdam, Quarido Verlag, 1934). These works contain interesting facts from the life of the famous physicist).

From that time on, Einstein came under the tutelage and service of world Zionism, which became one of the reasons for the incredible popularity of his creation. Since then, any criticism of the theory of relativity, in the spirit of Zionist practice, has been declared "anti-Semitism." And the senseless theory of relativity is used to fool the national elites of the goyim, to prepare them for the perception of the irrational and illogical. They are taught that common sense - direct sensible judgment and the very ability to think normally - does not exist, and that science has "proven" this.

The philosophical idealistic doctrine of relativity, the conventions of human knowledge - relativism received a "scientific" justification for the approval of mystical teachings and prejudices. Fertilized with mysticism, the mind can more easily perceive religious dogmas, biblical stories and social deception. The existence of orders, when some acquire villas and yachts, and build temples, synagogues, mosques and temples on the remains, while others drag out a miserable existence for years, cannot take place without interference beyond natural forces. The physical destruction of opponents is to some extent a solution to the problem, de-ideologization is much more effective - there are only sheep left for wool and skins.

The attack on the materialistic worldview met with resistance in our country. In the journal "Pod Znamenem Marksizma" (No. 1–2, 1922) the physicist prof. A.K. Timiryazev publishes an article where he points out that drawing public attention to the theory of relativity is necessary for those "friends of the revolution" who would like to destroy the sciences and restore "... the authority of religion and various currents of idealist philosophy at its service" the main merit of this theory is that it delivers a "fatal blow to materialism!" Analyzing the physical and philosophical essence of the theory, Timiryazev writes about its inconsistency. He shows that “Einstein gives real meaning to imaginary constructions,” and he sees the reason for this situation in the fact that “questions connected with the theory of relativity concern areas where we, with our technical means, cannot yet solve cases by laboratory experiments. And where the scientist is deprived of his faithful support, his mind can go crazy very easily." In No. 3 of the same journal, V. I. Lenin published an article "On the Significance of Militant Materialism," in which he defines the main tasks of the journal in strengthening the ideological foundations of our state.

He sets the task of rallying the forces of all consistent materialists under the leadership of the Communist Party as one of the primary ones, considering it very important "an alliance with representatives of modern natural science, who are inclined towards materialism and are not afraid to defend and profess it ...". As an example, Lenin notes that "A. Timiryazev's article on Einstein's theory of relativity allows us to hope that the journal will succeed in implementing this second alliance." This alliance is necessary because "without a solid philosophical foundation, no science, no materialism can withstand the struggle against the onslaught of bourgeois ideas and the restoration of the bourgeois world outlook." Lenin's testament was not fulfilled. Under the patronage of L. Trotsky, an ardent propagandist of relativism, A. M. Deborin (Ioffe), took the post of editor-in-chief of the journal Pod Znamenem Marksizma, without being a member of the ruling party. The popularization of the theory of relativity began to grow steadily. In a still illiterate country, the years of devastation “... the period 1922-1925. was published brochures and books on the theory of relativity with a total circulation of up to 100 thousand copies. Among the authors of brochures and books, let us name Cassier, Eddington, Born, Harry Schmidt, Lehmann, Auerbach, Moshkovsky, S. Norman; from Russian authors - Semkovsky, E. London, Fredericks, S. Lifshitz, B. Duchesse, Tan-Bogaz, and others. " ("Under the Banner of Marxism", No. 7, 1937, p. 46), and the total number of editions of Einstein's works and about Einstein in subsequent years is more than 1 million 300 thousand copies.

("Science and Technology", No. 9, 1984, p. 29). Not only mass propaganda began to be used, but also other methods of disseminating the theory. Here is what Acad. A.P. Alexandrov. “Soon after the war, it seems, in 1946, I was summoned to the Central Committee of the party and a conversation was started that quantum theory, the theory of relativity — all this is nonsense. Some company, not very clear to me, gathered. Two figures from Moscow State University tried especially hard. But I told them very simply: “The atomic bomb itself demonstrates the kind of transformation of matter and energy that follows from these new theories and from nothing else. Therefore, if we refuse them, then we must also refuse the bomb. Please give up quantum mechanics and make the bomb yourself, however you want ” (Izvestia, No. 205, July 23, 1988). 

A bold statement, I must say, the future president of the Academy of Sciences knew the strength of himself if he could engage in blackmailing I. V. Stalin and L. P. Beria. (...)

The use of the theory of relativity as a philosophical idea from the very beginning did not attract the approval of the majority of scientists, including those who indirectly created it. Indicative in this respect is the position of H. Lorentz, who acted as a natural scientist when, formulating his transformations, he tried to eliminate the inconsistency between the hypothesis of the electromagnetic ether and Michelson's experiment with the help of mathematical equations and physical assumptions. The scientific world of physicists at that time was convinced of the existence of the ether and that Michelson would determine the absolute speed by his experiment. The negative result of this experiment prompted Lorentz to build a physical model, in which such extravagant assumptions as changes in space and time of moving charges and other material bodies were applied, and others - to treat this model with conciliation. Earlier, a similar assumption was made by J.J. Thomson in relation to the mass of a moving electron. 

Einstein's contribution to the creation of the theory of relativity was manifested in the fact that, with his paradoxical postulate c = const, he transferred the difficulties of Lorentz's ethereal model to the field of formal reasoning and thought experiments, where there was no longer any place for any physical assumptions. That was to puzzle over the mystery of the nature of the constancy of the speed of light in the Michelson interferometer, it is better to simply declare: the speed of light is a constant value, without explanation and justification. Then the supposed cause of this phenomenon - the Lorentz transformation - logically becomes its consequence.

Simple and brilliant!

This cheating trick obtained the invulnerability of the theory of relativity for such a long time. Before physicists, it is protected by a philosophical orientation, before philosophers - by technical complexity, and before everyone else - by casuistic confusion and politicking.

Later, Lorenz did not see his offspring in the theory of relativity, so he never claimed co-authorship. In the presentation of Einstein, this theory has ceased even to resemble a physical theory. In it, no longer material bodies in motion, interacting with the ether, changed their forms in space and time, as in Lorentz, but space and time themselves have lost their classical forms. While Lorenz tacitly rejected the theory of relativity, others spoke out openly. The apologists of Machism present these statements as a manifestation of inertia and stupidity. So, N. Gardner wrote: “Many scientists were unable to free themselves from the old, Newtonian way of thinking. They were in many ways reminiscent of the scientists of the distant days of Galileo, who could not bring themselves to admit that Aristotle could be wrong.

Michelson himself, whose knowledge of mathematics was limited, did not recognize the theory of relativity, although his great experiment paved the way for the special theory of relativity." No, this is not sluggishness and stupidity - these words are in fact evidence of Michelson's steadfastness and deep understanding of the essence of the problem. 

“Later in 1935,” Gardner continues, “when I was a student at the University of Chicago, Prof. William Macmillan, a well-known scientist. 

He openly said that the theory of relativity was a sad misunderstanding. We, the modern generation, are too impatient to wait for anything, ”Macmillan wrote in 1927. - In the forty years that have passed since Michelson's attempt to detect the expected motion of the Earth relative to the ether, we have abandoned everything that we had been taught before, created a postulate, the most meaningless of all that we could only think of, and created a non-Newtonian mechanics consistent with this postulate. The achieved success is an excellent tribute to our mental activity and our wit, but there is no certainty that our common sense ”[26, p. 112]. 

Giving preference to judgment over experience, contributing to the erosion of the criteria for the truth of our knowledge, both natural science and socio-historical, the debatable hypothesis is used by certain forces in the political struggle, which is why it has not yet suffered the fate of many other hypotheses that have turned out to be scientifically untenable. Its assertion was also facilitated by the fact that, according to A. K. Timiryazev, “the theory of relativity is such an area of physics that not only has significant, but even supposed practical applications” [24, p.

164, T.2].