Frequently Asked Questions

Paul Marmet (1932-2005)

( Last checked 2011/02/14 - The estate of Paul Marmet )
Return to: List of Papers on the Web
Go to: Frequently Asked Questions

the icon

Series#1     Non Relative Velocities
In modern physics, it is generally claimed that “star aberration” discovered by Bradley occurs when there is a relative motion between a source of light and an observer.  However, contrary to that claim, it is commonly observed that the motion of stars in binary systems does not produce any aberration on Earth.  Consequently, light aberration depends only on the motion of the Earth in space. 

Series#2    Experimental Tests Invalidating Einstein's Relativity
Why should we believe that Einstein's theory of relativity is wrong?  Can you give an example of an experiment giving results which are contrary to Einstein's predictions?   Can you give a simple description of the Sagnac's  Experiment?   Since the Sagnac experiment was known in 1914 (even before the development of general relativity), how can Einstein's general relativity be accepted so readily around 1919?      Etc…

Series #3              Generalization of Mass-Energy Conservation.
In order to predict all the phenomena usually attributed to relativity, can we just take into account the change of mass (due to kinetic and all other energies) and use Newton's equations (without any new physics)?  Since both the electron mass and the proton mass increase in the same proportion, does this compensate so that the atomic energy levels remain the same?   Apart of the fact that there is a change of electron mass inside atoms, is there any other important changes in atoms which have consequences when we apply Newton's classical mechanics?   Etc ….

Series #4              Flat Universe - and - Common sense. 
Can you explain in words, what is the nature of the changes that have been introduced by Einstein, as a consequence of the theory of General Relativity?
In the nineteenth century, physics used Newton's method. All physical phenomena could be explained with a mechanical model. That model was using diagrams to give clear illustrations and mechanisms whose components were functioning using plain logic. However, in the 20th century physics, "conventional logic" is no longer acceptable among the FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS of relativity and quantum mechanics. It is clearly rejected. Common sense is no longer considered as a valid argument, when explanations are looked for.    Why should "common sense" be banned in an argumentation in favor or against a physical model? Etc…………

Series #5       Theories and Theories.
In order to calculate phenomena involving relativity we use Einstein's equations. For example, let us consider the advance of the perihelion of Mercury. Einstein's equation leads to the observed result. However, even before Einstein, Gerber in 1898 gave an equation giving also the correct prediction (same equation). After Gerber and Einstein, several scientists used other mathematical transformations that lead to the same prediction. Some of those scientists are: Von Laue M 1917, Oppenheim S 1917, Seeliger H 1917, Morgan H R 1930, Idelstrom Alex 1948, Brown G B 1958, Nedved R 1994, Renshaw R & Kallefitz W 1996.    Does that mean that we understand relativity?   What is going on inside the  atoms of matter, so that we could find a logical and satisfactory explanation to length contraction and time dilation.

Series #6          Principle of Equivalence.
Einstein's theory of Relativity considers that the gravitational force of acceleration is identical to the inertial force of acceleration. Einstein claims that these two accelerations are undistinguishable. In reality, is there any possibility to distinguish these two accelerations?

Series #7          Earth Paradox 
How can the experiment above with light moving across each of the 133425 lines every microsecond be compatible with the observed Sagnac effect? How can the time taken, to go around the world be longer when going Eastward then Westward, since there are the same number of lines (133425)? 

Series #8        Why Quantum Mechanics is  Non-sense?
Why can we say that Quantum Mechanics is Non-sense?   Why do we disagree with the  Establishment in Physics?  What Exactly is the Copenhagen  Interpretation?
Who proposed the Copenhagen  Interpretation of Modern Physics?   Does the Copenhagen Interpretation solve  the problems of Modern Physics?   Do some scientists recognize that it is some  sort of hoax?

Series  #9  The Michelson-Morley Experiment:
In the Michelson-Morley Experiment, it is believed that a null result "proves" that the velocity of light is the same in both directions, as measured in the moving frame.  There is so much confidence in the demonstration done by Michelson in 1887 that nobody bothers to make a thorough re-examination of that demonstration.  In fact there are at least two ignored phenomena  explained in this paper, which changes the predictions. 

Series #10   Energy Required to Move a Mass from the Pole to the Equator.
We know that the Earth equator is at a greater distance from the Earth center than the poles.  Similarly, orbiting satellites are at a larger distance when apogee.  However, clocks run at a higher rate at the apogee, while clocks run at the same rate at the equator and at the pole.   Do we need a special mechanism to explain those facts?   No, because the problem is quite different. It requires external (Earth) energy to move from the equator to the pole but there is no change of total energy between apogee and perigee.

Series #11     Proof that the Deflection of Light by the Sun is NOT Compatible with the Principle of Mass-Energy  Conservation.
How can we show that Light is NOT Deflected by the Gravitational Potential of the Sun?
There are several ways to prove it.  Here is one here.

Series #12      Why the Lifetime of Disintegrating Particles Becomes Longer at High Velocity.
How can we explain that the lifetime of Muons becomes longer at high velocity?   Since the internal components of the nucleus in nuclear physics also acquire energy with velocity, we can show that this is a consequence of the principle of mass-energy conservation.  Here are more information about that mechanism. 

Series #13   Classical Relationship between E=mc2 and m=gmo.
We see that the mass-energy relationship E=mc2, has been developed by Thomson’s in 1881 and Heaviside in 1889 well before Einstein.   Also, using the principle of mass-energy conservation in equation E=mc2, we calculate the increase of mass of a particle due to its increase of kinetic energy.   We find that the increase of mass is given by the relationship m=gmo

Series #14  They burn heretics, don't they?
We reproduce here a comment published in New Scientist by Arturo Sangalli.  It shows how "the 'purity' of science is being guarded by a self-imposed inquisition called peer review" as stated by the British scientist James Lovelock in his book Small Science


Series #15  Origin of Redshift 
This note explains that the gravitational redshift observed from massive stars is not due to a loss to energy of photons while they travel through a gravitational field.  The redshift is due to the fact that the atoms located in a deep gravitational potential emit a lower frequency due to the gravitational potential on these atoms, as calculated using quantum mechanics. 

Series #16 Space
ThisTime a "Physical" Dimension?   How many physical dimensions are necessary to give a complete description of all matter in the universe?   What is the meaning of Proper Values?   Why does the local observer (in a moving frame) not use the same universal standard meter (and standard clock) as defined everywhere else (instead of his local meter and local clock)?   Etc…


Return to: Top of page

Return to: List of papers on the web
Information: About the author