| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | The [[theory of relativity]] is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.<ref>See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by [[Barack Obama]]. Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold.</ref> Here is a list of 29 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect. | + | The [[theory of relativity]] is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.<ref>See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by [[Barack Obama]]. Virtually no one who is taught and believes Relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold.</ref> Here is a list of 29 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect. |
| | | | |
| | #The [[Pioneer anomaly]]. | | #The [[Pioneer anomaly]]. |
| | #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> |
| − | #Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by relativity, well beyond the margin of error.<ref>In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming relativity.</ref> | + | #Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by Relativity, well beyond the margin of error.<ref>In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of Relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming Relativity.</ref> |
| | #The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light. | | #The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light. |
| | #The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass? | | #The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass? |
| Line 30: |
Line 30: |
| | #In [[Genesis (ch.1)|Genesis 1:6-8]], we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous [[aether]]. | | #In [[Genesis (ch.1)|Genesis 1:6-8]], we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous [[aether]]. |
| | #Despite a century of wasting billions of dollars in work on the theory, "No one knows how to solve completely the equations of general relativity that describe gravity; they are simply beyond current understanding."<ref>[http://www.mathunion.org/o/General/Prizes/2006/TaoENG.pdf Statement in awarding the coveted Fields Medal]</ref> | | #Despite a century of wasting billions of dollars in work on the theory, "No one knows how to solve completely the equations of general relativity that describe gravity; they are simply beyond current understanding."<ref>[http://www.mathunion.org/o/General/Prizes/2006/TaoENG.pdf Statement in awarding the coveted Fields Medal]</ref> |
| − | #The searchlight paradox: If an observer is at a certain distance of a rotating searchlight, the farthest away the observer is, the faster the beam will sweep past him. Theoretically, if the observer is far enough, there is nothing to prevent the beam to sweep past him faster than the speed of light. This effect actually happens when observing [[pulsar]]s. Most physicists, although accepting this fact, claim that does not disprove relativity, since you cannot transmit any information in such way. This last claim can be easily disproved by nothing that the light source can be, for example, a movie projector, in which case you are moving an image faster than light. | + | #The searchlight paradox: If an observer is at a certain distance of a rotating searchlight, the farthest away the observer is, the faster the beam will sweep past him. Theoretically, if the observer is far enough, there is nothing to prevent the beam to sweep past him faster than the speed of light. This effect actually happens when observing [[pulsar]]s. Most physicists, although accepting this fact, claim that does not disprove Relativity, since you cannot transmit any information in such way. This last claim can be easily disproved by nothing that the light source can be, for example, a movie projector, in which case you are moving an image faster than light. |
| − | #The barn and ladder paradox: Person A has a ladder too long to store in his barn. Person B takes the ladder and runs very fast into the barn. For A, who is at rest with respect to the ladder, the ladder will contract, and if the velocity is fast enough, it will fit in the barn. But to B, who is moving with the ladder, it is the barn that will contract, making the problem even worse. So, who is correct? Does the ladder fit in the barn? This problem was considered in the book Introduction to Electrodynamics by David Griffiths, and the author, who supports relativity, claim that both are correct. The ladder both fit and doesn’t fit in the barn. This is obviously against elementary rules of logic. | + | #The barn and ladder paradox: Person A has a ladder too long to store in his barn. Person B takes the ladder and runs very fast into the barn. For A, who is at rest with respect to the ladder, the ladder will contract, and if the velocity is fast enough, it will fit in the barn. But to B, who is moving with the ladder, it is the barn that will contract, making the problem even worse. So, who is correct? Does the ladder fit in the barn? This problem was considered in the book Introduction to Electrodynamics by David Griffiths, and the author, who supports Relativity, claim that both are correct. The ladder both fit and doesn’t fit in the barn. This is obviously against elementary rules of logic. |
| | (add to list) | | (add to list) |
| | | | |