2
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 19:
Line 19: − + Line 47:
Line 47: +
Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 16:20, June 16, 2012
, 16:20, June 16, 2012no edit summary
#The orbital eccentricity of the [[Moon]]'s orbit is increasing, contrary to what Relativity predicts.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.0212</ref>
#The orbital eccentricity of the [[Moon]]'s orbit is increasing, contrary to what Relativity predicts.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.0212</ref>
#The [[Pioneer anomaly]].
#The [[Pioneer anomaly]].
#Subatomic particles with mass have a speed observed to be as fast as the speed of light ("we are 100% sure that the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos"<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17364682</ref>), which contradicts Relativity because the [[Lorentz factor]] is then infinite.<ref>http://www.hindustantimes.com/Roll-over-Einstein-Law-of-physics-challenged/Article1-749189.aspx - note that a similar observation of faster-than-light speeds was also made in 2007 (with a larger margin of error).</ref><ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/18/us-science-neutrinos-light-idUSTRE7AH0T720111118</ref> Neutrinos were observed to travel at the speed of light by an independent experiment also: "Their neutrinos traveled at precisely the speed of light, not faster or slower."<ref>http://junkscience.com/2012/03/21/no-you-still-cant-go-faster-than-light/</ref>
#Subatomic particles with mass have a speed observed to be as fast as the speed of light ("we are 100% sure that the speed of light is faster than the speed of neutrinos"<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17364682</ref>), which does not contradict Relativity because the [[Lorentz factor]] is then finite.<ref>http://www.hindustantimes.com/Roll-over-Einstein-Law-of-physics-challenged/Article1-749189.aspx - note that a similar observation of faster-than-light speeds was also made in 2007 (with a larger margin of error).</ref><ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/18/us-science-neutrinos-light-idUSTRE7AH0T720111118</ref> Neutrinos were observed to travel at the speed of light by an independent experiment also: "Their neutrinos traveled at precisely the speed of light, not faster or slower."<ref>http://junkscience.com/2012/03/21/no-you-still-cant-go-faster-than-light/</ref>
#Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by [[Earth]] ("flybys").<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/</ref>
#Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by [[Earth]] ("flybys").<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/</ref>
#Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen, nonexistent "[[dark matter]]" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1873</ref> "Dark matter mysteriously missing around sun. Theories say neighborhood should be filled with it, but new study shows otherwise."<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47101905</ref>
#Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen, nonexistent "[[dark matter]]" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1873</ref> "Dark matter mysteriously missing around sun. Theories say neighborhood should be filled with it, but new study shows otherwise."<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47101905</ref>
#The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (<math>2 \pi R</math>) is length-contracted. However, since <math>R</math> is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to an apparent paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal <math>R</math>, or is it less than <math>R</math>?
#The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (<math>2 \pi R</math>) is length-contracted. However, since <math>R</math> is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to an apparent paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal <math>R</math>, or is it less than <math>R</math>?
#Based on Relativity, Einstein predicted in 1905 that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory; they also make the implausible claim that relativistic effects from gravitation precisely offset the effects from differences in velocity.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5255/abs/227270a0.html</ref>
#Based on Relativity, Einstein predicted in 1905 that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory; they also make the implausible claim that relativistic effects from gravitation precisely offset the effects from differences in velocity.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5255/abs/227270a0.html</ref>
#The theory of Relativity was proposed by a man vastly more intelligent than the combined denizens of this website, and has in fact been verified 100 fold. Collapse into blackholes are not dependent on "weight" (which isn't even relevant in space as mass is what's actually measured) but on density and star age. The aether was disproved countless times by the Michelson-Morely experiment, but I can hardly expect the oh so scientifically literate conservapedia to understand it. The point depicting wormholes was infact not proposed by relativity at all, and even if they were would not violate causality because what you're saying is a bunch of hokum. While Relativity is infact in conflict with classical QM theory, it does not mean either of them are "false." Why is this website even real? Is it meant as a joke? I can't tell because they way it flies against common knowledge is almost satirical.
#The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his "clock" (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because ''both'' twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative. Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.<ref group="note">Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be ''de minimis''.</ref>
#The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his "clock" (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because ''both'' twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative. Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.<ref group="note">Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be ''de minimis''.</ref>
#Based on Relativity, Einstein claimed in 1909 that the [[aether (science)|aether]] does not exist, but in order to make subatomic physics work right, theorists had to introduce the aether-like concept of the Higgs field, which fills all of space and breaks symmetries.
#Based on Relativity, Einstein claimed in 1909 that the [[aether (science)|aether]] does not exist, but in order to make subatomic physics work right, theorists had to introduce the aether-like concept of the Higgs field, which fills all of space and breaks symmetries.