-----------------------

A. - Because several experiments have shown very clearly that the results are not compatible with Einstein's predictions of general relativity. One can also think of other important reasons, (like the non-conservation of momentum and mass-energy in general relativity [Ref.]) but this has been discussed elsewhere (see Einstein's Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics).

-----------------------

A. - Yes. One of the most simple and remarkable experiment showing that Nature is not compatible with Einstein's hypothesis is the one described by Sagnac in 1914. (Ref. Sagnac M. G.,

-----------------------

A. - Yes. Here is a simple description.

Let us assume that you have a source of light (a laser) at a certain location on Earth (e.g. your home). You project that beam of light directly toward a satellite in orbit around the Earth on which there is a reflecting mirror. After that first reflection, light reaches other mirrors in space so that it can finally complete a full turn around the Earth and reach again the same spot on Earth where light has been emitted.

Using that apparatus, you can measure the time it takes for light to make a complete turn around the Earth when light moves from West to East. Now, if you repeat the same experiment, with the same mirrors, (or even do it simultaneously), using light moving from East to West, you find that the time taken by light to move from East to West is shorter than the time taken for light to complete the revolution in the opposite direction. That difference of time is observed with the same apparatus, making simultaneous measurements, at the same location. One can show that this difference is due to the Classical Newtonian motion of Earth rotation. That difference of time for light taken between each direction depends directly on the velocity of the Earth moving around itself.

Einstein's Theory claims that there is no possible way to detect the ABSOLUTE velocity of the Earth. The very use of the expression RELATIVITY comes from Einstein's hypothesis that parameters, like VELOCITY, are relative so that any absolute motion (like absolute velocity) is meaningless. However, we see above, that the velocity of Earth is responsible for the change of time light takes to go around the Earth. From a fixed location on Earth, we can detect the Earth's motion. Therefore, contrary to Einstein principle of relativity, the velocity of light is not relative to the observer. One must conclude that the Sagnac effect contradicts Einstein's hypothesis of General Relativity.

Let us note that in practice, the Sagnac effect is observed quite easily. In order to observe that effect, you do not have to make a full circle around the Earth. If you make light rotate around a diameter of only one meter and many rotations, (in either directions) you will observe the same effect. The slight change of time interval to travel in either directions can be detected using interference patterns between the beams moving simultaneously in opposite directions. This method is very sensitive to detect a very small rate of rotation. Such an observation is very important in ships (or spaceships) and in airplanes. It is a kind of optical gyroscope (laser gyroscope) manufactured commercially in large number. This optical gyroscope detects the absolute velocity of the rotating Earth from any location on Earth, even if Einstein's theory claims that light travels with respect to the observer.

There is also a Straight-Line-Component Sagnac effect. (see Einstein's Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics, chapter 9). This will not be developed here. The Sagnac effect has been discussed in many papers. Recently, A. Kelly (The Sagnac Effect and GPS Synchronization of Clock-Stations) presented a paper at the meeting of "Galileo Back in Italy", Bologna May 1999. Ref. A. G. Kelly, HDS Energy Limited Celbridge, Co, Kildare, Ireland. The Sagnac effect on the GPS Clock synchronization is extremely important.

One can conclude that you can possess now your own instrument that measures the ABSOLUTE velocity of rotation of the Earth, which is in striking contradiction with Einstein's Theory of Relativity, while most of the scientists still refuse to accept that this can actually work. This is the most striking proof that Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is wrong.

-----------------------

A. - For the same reason that in Galileo's time, when people refused to accept that it was not the Sun (nor the sky) which is moving around the Earth.

During Galileo's time, the interpretation of the bible was that EVERYTHING in the sky was moving around the Earth. However, a contrary observation was already definitely observed using Galileo's first telescope (when observing the satellites of Jupiter moving around Jupiter). It is reported that the monks even refused to look through the Galileo's telescope. Modern physics is dogmatic and possesses many characteristics of a religion.

-----------------------

A. - The Sagnac experiment has been measured a large number of times during the last century. In the case of an experiment of radio waves moving around the Earth, Michelson and Gale (Ref

-----------------------

A. - Let us consider the Earth equator as a rotating disk. Let "R" the radius of the disk and "w " the angular velocity of rotation of the disk (Earth equator). The velocity V of the observer (with his clock and his measuring meter) at distance R from the center is:

1 |

We have seen in the book: "Einstein's Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics that due to the velocity of the observer's frame, and as a consequence of the principle of mass-energy conservation, the unit of length changes (see equation 3.23) in the same proportion as the local clock rate (equation 3.10). Consequently, the velocity (which is the quotient of these two numbers) measured by the moving observer is represented by exactly the same number of local meters per local second. The measured velocity is the same whether we use rest units V

2 |

Due to the velocity of the rotating disk, the matter at the outer part of the disk should be dilated as calculated by equation 3.23 This means that the local Bohr radius (of atoms) is larger, due to the kinetic energy. However, since the radius of the disk R is constant, the geometrical perimeter 2pR is also constant. Consequently, the natural expansion of matter due to the increase of Bohr radius will produce a force of compression on the atoms of the disk at the radius R. This phenomenon is similar to what happens when we squeeze matter. The inter atomic distance is reduced due to the pressure, as calculated in classical mechanics with the Young modulus. Of course, "space contraction", claimed in many papers, does not make sense.

Let us now calculate the time taken by light to complete a full circle around the rotating disk. When the disk is stationary, light makes a full rotation around the disk after a time interval "t" equals to:

3 |

Let us calculate the time interval when both light and the observer's velocity make an anti clockwise rotation. Since "light" and the "observer" travel in the same direction, an observer

4 |

We have seen above (and also in the book) that between frames, the clock rate changes in the same proportion as the units of length. Furthermore we have seen (equation 2 above), that all measurements of the velocity are the same in any frame. Consequently, equation 4 becomes:

5 |

6 |

7 |

8 |

9 |

Equation 9 is

In order to determine the

10 |

11 |

12 |

13 |

14 |

15 |

16 |

17 |

18 |

This is not only in perfect agreement with the Sagnac experiments, but also agrees with the results expected from an absolute frame of reference, in which light is traveling at velocity c with respect to a fixed frame at rest. Equation 18 shows that for a circular trajectory, the

When the velocity of light is measured after being reflected back on a single line toward the original location, (as measured most of the time), we have seen that the velocity of light

As demonstrated previously, the

Whatever the method of measurement is, we have seen that all results are compatible with a constant velocity of light moving in an

It is clear that the physics of the 20

It is important to notice that all these results have been confirmed experimentally. In the case of circular trajectories Sagnac (Sagnac M. G.

This shows that the absolute velocity of light "c" with respect to a fixed frame in space is an experimental fact. The results are compatible with all known experiments. More general information is given in the book;

-------------------------

A. - Yes, several experiments show that those two forces have a different nature, because they lead to different results. The force of gravity can be applied during a long time without requiring energy. However, the acceleration involving a change of velocity requires energy. It is well known that they lead to quite different consequences that can be verified experimentally.

-----------------------

A. - Let us compare the consequences of

Consider a mass standing on the surface of the Earth. After one year, the mass submitted to gravitational acceleration is always standing there, without changing its energy or velocity. Let us also consider another identical mass, submitted to an inertial acceleration of one G in outer space due to the push of a rocket. After one year, the enormous energy given to the mass is such that its velocity has reached an important fraction of the velocity of light. If that mass falls on Earth its energy produces a gigantic crater on the impact. Einstein's theory claims that these two phenomena are equivalent and indistinguishable. This is non-sense. Any scientist should be able to see the difference. In order to convince people, Einstein adds that there is no difference for the observer located in the moving mass' frame of reference.

In order to illustrate Einstein's argument, let us consider another case in which relative motion is observed. A well known example is when we observe the Sun and the stars crossing the sky everyday, (or the sunrise or the sunset). Relative to the Earth surface, the sky is moving around us and the Sun disappears below the horizon. However, we all know that Galileo, using astronomical data, observed that in fact, it is the Earth that rotates and not the Sun (and the sky). Using external astronomical information, Galileo found the correct motion of the Earth, which led him to correct our understanding of the motion of planets in the solar system. The simple observation of the relative motion of the Sun and stars around us, which previously led to the pre-Galilean naive claim of the motion of the sky around us, was very poor science. GOOD SCIENCE TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL POSSIBLE OBSERVATIONS AVAILABLE. It is very bad science to ignore voluntarily some of the information available.

In the case of the inertial acceleration of the mass during one year, it is bad science to ignore the fact that the mass submitted to an inertial acceleration needs energy for that acceleration and will restore later the energy acquired. The mass accelerated by the rocket has acquired energy and an increase of "mass equivalent" (m=E/c

One must conclude that the Einstein's principle of equivalence between inertial and gravitational acceleration leads to a catastrophic physical incoherence between inertial systems. Einstein's equivalence principle between inertial and gravitational forces is not compatible with coherent observations. This principle of equivalence between inertial and gravitational mass is bad science belonging to pre-Galilean epoch.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>

**Return
to
top
of
page**

**Go to:
Previous Series of Questions**

**Go to: Next
Series of Questions**

**Return to list of
questions**

**Return to list
of papers**

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>

** invalidation.html
Series
2
Tests
Invalidating
Relativity
**July,
1999