2011/02/14 - The estate of
Paul Marmet )
modern physics, it is generally claimed that “star aberration”
discovered by Bradley occurs when there is a relative motion between a
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.
should we believe that Einstein's theory of relativity is
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
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
in the same proportion, does this compensate so that the atomic energy
levels remain the same? Apart of the fact that there is a
electron mass inside atoms, is there any other important changes in
atoms which have consequences when we apply Newton's classical
mechanics? Etc ….
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
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
banned in an argumentation in favor or against a physical model? Etc…………
#5 Theories and Theories.
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
satisfactory explanation to length contraction and time dilation.
#6 Principle of
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
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
#8 Why Quantum Mechanics
can we say that Quantum Mechanics is Non-sense? Why do we
with the Establishment in Physics? What Exactly is the
proposed the Copenhagen Interpretation of Modern
Physics? Does the
Copenhagen Interpretation solve the problems of Modern
some scientists recognize that it is some sort of hoax?
#9 The Michelson-Morley Experiment:
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
least two ignored phenomena explained in this paper, which
#10 Energy Required to Move a Mass from the Pole to the
know that the Earth equator is at a greater distance from the Earth
center than the poles. Similarly, orbiting satellites are at a
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
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.
#11 Proof that the Deflection of Light by the
Sun is NOT Compatible with the Principle of Mass-Energy
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.
#12 Why the Lifetime of Disintegrating
Particles Becomes Longer at High Velocity.
can we explain that the lifetime of Muons becomes longer at high
velocity? Since the internal components of the nucleus in
physics also acquire energy with velocity, we can show that this is a
consequence of the principle of mass-energy conservation. Here
more information about that mechanism.
#13 Classical Relationship between E=mc2
We see that the mass-energy
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
They burn heretics, don't they?
We reproduce here a comment
published in New Scientist by Arturo Sangalli. It shows how "the
peer review" as stated by the British scientist James
Lovelock in his book Small Science.
#15 Origin of Redshift
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
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
a "Physical" Dimension? How many physical dimensions are
give a complete description of all matter in the universe?
the meaning of Proper Values? Why does the local observer
moving frame) not use the same universal standard meter (and standard
clock) as defined everywhere else (instead of his local meter and local
Return to: Top of page
Return to: List of papers on
Information: About the