Re: Il paradosso dei gemelli.

Inviato da  ivan il 2/2/2007 19:47:39
Dalla letteratura:




By O.Tedenstig
Idungatan 37
19551 Märsta
Date : 11/12-1994

Einstein's theory of relativity, both the special and the general, belongs to the most well known mental buildings in philosophy and science. The number of published works today can be counted in tens of thousands (no one knows exactly) and the originator himself, Albert Einsteins has been subject for a countless number of person biographical works. The interest for his person in many respects can be compared with the interest dedicated the great religious leaders (Jesus, Mohammed) or the great prophets or founders of the great poli-tical mass movements (Marx, Lenin). And dealing with the theory also reminds what is characterizing such mass movements and doctrinaire systems.

Characteristics common for all types of those mass movements are the presence of a doctrinary system of theses not permitted to be questioned, a prophet or dominant leader with an unlimited authority, a church or institution administrating the doctrines and a lot of high priests, predecessors of the scientific power establishment.

The fact that a mental building has been widely spread and got broad acceptance necessarily not constitutes any guarantee for that a theory is correct and true.
In a flashback of the history looking at theory buildings of similar dogmatic nature, insprire to reflection. Most of these theories which were supported by the power elite, both in science and church during a long period of time, were later revealed as totally mad and wrong. In most cases change was propelled, not by the scientific community itself, but by individual well informed peoples, thinkers and true scientists, most often working in direct confrontation with the current opinion, sometimes with risk for their own lives, incorruptible and brave peoples who placed the truth on the first place in their scientific work. We know that there still exist such peoples active in our time but their message are like a silent voice in the dessert, few are prepared to listen.

To officially cast suspicion upon the theory of relativity, hence exposing it for criticism, is to confess your silliness and that you not has grasped anything. H.C.Andersson's anecdote of the emperor's new closes gives a good illustration.
Persons who not were competent for their jobs, could not see the nice clothes the emperor was wearing, weaved by the lying and cunning weavers. An innocent child said that which the prudent peoples not dared to confess, namely that the emperor was naked and that his clothes just was bluff and humbug.

Einstein's theory is naked but very few dare to confess it. What the theory has to offer of solution of real physical problems are only of pure fictive and imaginary nature, in the same way as in the story of the emperor's new clothes, lacking substance and content. It's apparent that most problems, which plead for a solution within the conceptual
framework of this theory only is of artificial, fictive and
imaginary nature.

A theory which has got so a large spreading and common acceptance in the world of science, impossibly can be wrong !
How can serious working scientists be so mad that they support an erroneous theory for so long time, spending so much time, sweat and troubles on a hopeless erroneous idea ? Is the fact that a theory get large acceptanceness a guaranty of that the theory is correct and true ? No. In a flashback of the history of science many theories have got large support during long periods of time, but was later on shown to be totally wrong.
And the historians cannot either really explain why some theories or thoughts get a higher degree of acceptance and penetration than other comparable alternative theories.

One reason of the popularity may be that the theory of relativity contains parts of mystic and elements of religious supernatural nature. Many are attracted by such things, even scientist obviously. The theory also has a pronounced mathematical structure which attracts personalities specificly appreciating theoretical abstractions, not being disturbed by the fact that these abstractions not correspond to anything real in the outside world.

The theory has been criticized by many since its birth, by individual researchers, prominents scientists as well as by more unknowns individiual researchers, both from outside and inside the scientific and academic community. But commonly all this critics has been leaved un-answered. The relativists feel so secure and so safe in their position, that they not bother to reply to a given criticism. Silence is one of the weapon used, exposing an enormeous self-reliance,superciliousness and disregards against them who venture to hint doubts about Einstein's theories.

The question of right or wrong, contrary to what commonly is declared, not only is a question of the presence of substantial facts. Many other factors involved are of significant importance, factors being of quite another nature than pure scientific. That is a fruitful field of research engaging historians trying to understand the mechanisms behind development of scientific theories and how the scientific community works.

One important factor in this trend is the control of power of knowledge. When a theory has been established, it seems not so important wether the theory is correct or wrong. What is important is to maintain the position of power which has been reached. That gives access to money, prestige and power over
the research resources, both regarding money and human brain resources.

The theory of relativity has been very successful in that special task. The relativists have reached a position which they not are prepared to give up, even if alternative theories should be offered, which in a better way would describe the world around us. And the relativists have of that reason got access to very great resources as well as succeeded to usurp common sympathy from peoples in common, from mass media, from publishing houses, from contributors of different kinds, giving money or pure moralic support to the research associated to the theory.

In this way the relativists have reached full control of the free scientific press and the mass media, which without any murmur of protest proced to spread the Einsteinian dogmas.
Given critics or offering competitive alternative theories can in this way effectively be supressed, controlled and stopped.

Many who start to have a very positive attitude to Einstein and his theories, in addition having real ambitions of understand and learn the theory, very soon is frustrated and give up. They give up, not because of intellectual unabilities to understand, but because there is nothing substantial there to be understood. Those who still support the theory, saying they have grasped something or at least giving impression of it, obviously not is disturbed by the fact that the theory just is producing empty, fictive and imagniary results.

And to di gone's way out of the labyrinth of relativity mostly seems to be a hopeless and frustrating task, claiming a wast of time and effort resulting in nothing. And a critical analysis of the theory, based on common scientific methods, of common sence and logical analysis, produces pure confusions which intelligent persons claiming logical consequence of their thinking, impossibly can accept.

The confusions arises by that all the time logical contradictions are pointed out, amplified by that the basic concepts used are elastical and continuously accomodated in time to that the ongoing analysis produces their own problems. By this way everything seems to float around in a chaotic mixture of
hypothetical concepts and assumptions impossible to get in any order.

In spite of that the theory now is more than 75 years old, the relativists themselves are not in agree how the basic concepts of the theory shall be interpreted or how the critics of the theory shall be treated. In the light of all given criticism, if the theory was to be regarded as normal science, not much would remain by it. But obviously the theory is not normal science but something quite else, it seems to balance in the
grey zone of science, science fiction, religion and pure philosophy not reachable for any common analytical method.

Science is said to be a selfcontrolled process where erroneous theories automatically are eliminated. But that seems not to be true for the theory of relativity, which consequently seems to disregard these basic, etical rules of science. In spite of that the critics since long time ago ought to reject the theory from the scene of sceince, the theory seems today be more popular than even before.

The relativists will make show of being sound and rational in their thinking, but at the same time one are prepared to accept conclusions which are completely against ever scientific rule and all common sense. And without any signs of selfcriticism one are manipulating nature on pure arbitrary basis, refusing the ability of the human mind of deciding right or wrong.

Common sense, Einstein said, only is these predestinated meanings a man work out when 18-teen, then keeping these ideas the life out. And when the theory produces obvious contradictionary results, one even are prepared to dispute the ability of the human intellect, that instead of rejecting the theory as physically invalid. By this criminal and dishonest attitude, the theory of relativity has been a hint for a true and sound searching for truth in science and the way of solving the deep mysteries of nature.


Einstein's special theory of relativity from 1905 is founded on two basic hypotheses or concepts, even named postulates, which are as follows :



Einstein published his theory in year 1905 of the title "ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES". Another principle being a part of the theory and also giving the theory its popular name is "THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY" - from the beginning originated by Poincar'e about five years before that Einstein published his theory.

The including of the relativity principle shows that the Einstein's second postulate is incomplete which conceals that Einstein himself not understood the meaning of his own postulate. The principle namely imply that the velcoity of light in free space is invariant even to an observer moving in relation to the source, that is to say, the propagation of light is a real universal invariant cosmical constant, useable as a reference for all movements in the physical world. Of that reason
the second postulate has to be redefined to :


In a personal letter from Einstein to a friend of him, Erwin Finley Freundlich 1913 he says:



All revolutionary theories have had its own prehistory. A new theory will not pop up from nothing, it will be a product of many individual contributors both successful and less successful collected over a long period of time. In this time when Einstein suggested his theory, it had been preceded by a tedious scientific debate about properties of space and the basic nature of light. In the first place it was the aether theories for the propagation of light which was dominating the
debate and which was amplified by Maxwell's electromagnetic theory from 1873.

Einstein was one of these persons who in this chaotic situation presented a quite different and radical idea. Instead of solving the problem which was discussed, he declared them as non_existent. He did that by introducing two postulates, where one of them proclaimed that the propagating velocity of
light in vacou was an absolute physical constant, not effected either by movements of the source nor by movements of the observer. The aether concept was eleminiated, replacing it by nothing.

Einstein has been praised for his originality and boldness while he suggested principles of nature which was challenging common sense. However, his originality can be put in question because research has shown that many of his ideas were common known long before him. But Einstein was lucky because his ideas were accepted by a group of well known and prominent
academics of that time : von Laue, Minkowski, Lorentz, Mach, Planck, Poincar'e and others. Einstein became an enormeous authority in science and became a symbol for geniality and originality, a guarantee for that the theory of relativity was correct and true.

Einstein's theory of relativity was published 1905 by the name "ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES" and was later followed by the general theory 1916. Besides these works, for which Einstein got his most fame, he did achievements in the area of quantum physics, " the photo electrical effect", a theory which later gave him the Nobel Prize Award. Hence not, contrary to what commonly is believed, he did not got the prize for his relativity theory which was judged to be too controversial of the members of the Nobel Committe.

Einstein published his theory at a time constituting a climax of debate concerning the fundamental nature of light and space going on since Newton's time. So, much was discussed and investigated when Einstein entered the scene. At an official lectures about five years earlier Poincar'e had suggested THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY in Paris and in St. Louis is USA.

THE LENGTH CONTRACTION OF PHYSICAL OBJECTS had been suggested 1892 by Lorentz and Fitzgerald undependably of each other as a suggestion of solving Michelson and Morley's light interferometer experiments some years earlier with beginning from 1887 (note however that length contraction never has been proved
experimentally, hence not any physical reality).

THE TIME DILATION HYPOTHESIS saying that physical clocks will slow down as a result of moving in relation to a light source was suggested by J.Larmor already 1900 and the formula for it is the same as in Einstein's theory.

THE MASS INCREASE of moving particles was experimentally discovered by Kaufman in 1901,
hence was no theoritical prediction by the relativity theory. This phenomenon some years later was investigated by A. Pais and Lorentz who also were suggesting mathematical expressions for this mass increase, expressions which appear in Einstein's
theory later.

And even THE FORMULA E=m.c(2) suggesting a close relationship between energy and mass was suggested several years before Einstein by Lorentz, Poincar'e, Langevin and others. THE MATHEMATICS OF SPACE AND TIME was developed by Lorentz and appear in modified form in Einstein's theory.

THE CONSTANT PROPAGATING VELOCITY OF LIGHT IN VACUUM had with increasing precision been confirmed by experiments with begin-ning by Ole Römer in the seventeenth century but not covered by any ultimate experiments including moving sources and obser-
vers, which Einstein's theory claims. It was not any great achievement to suggest it and the risk of disclosing it was minimal. And in addition, from the beginning it was Maxwell's idea to define that the velocity of light from moving sources was invariant and he had good reasons for it because his theo-
ry was an aether theory. Einstein had no such concrete reason to offer.

Hence, Einstein's theory was mainly constructed by two fundamental postulates, combined with the principle of relativity. The theory generates results which violate common sense, but the theory has in spite of that succeeded to get common acceptable. That is very strange in light of the fact that science in commonly is very careful in judging results from new theories.



A brief list over some physical facts which are treated in the theory of relativity may looks like follows :

* The velocity of light in that
way it can be measured by an
observer (by using measuring
rods and clocks) always is
constant undependably by wether
the source or the observer move

* Only relative movements between
objects is physically relevant,
absolute movements cannot be
either measured, nor defined

* Physical clocks go slower as
result of relative movements in
relation to another objects
moving in the vicinity

* Absolute time doesn't exists
and cannot even be defined

* Relative velocity between two
objects cannot exceed the stan-
dard velocity of light even if
each single object separately
posses this velocity

* Physical objects contract as
function of relative movement
in relation to objects in the

* The mass content of physical
objects increases as function
of relative movement related to
an object in the vicinity

* An event which for one observer
is apprehended as simultaneous
is not simultaneous for another
observer who move in relation
to the first observer

* Gravitation is no force, just a
curvature in the space time
continuum, a line which astro-
nomical bodies follow in their

That is some of all those "physical" consequences which are referred to as results of the theory. In aim to in some degree illustrate some of these physical absurdities, we shall briefly examine some special cases. Much of that is allready known facts from litterature. And in some very troublesome cases the relativists themselves have realized that the critics may be resonable. But the result in most cases only has resulted in slight modifications, that without taking the correct consequences by it, namely to totally rejet the theory.

Einstein's theories can in many respects be compared with a labyrinth without way out. This person who want to understand will very soon feel frustrated and desperate. The reason to that depends on using unprecice and elastic definitions which are changed all the time critics points out logical contradictions produced by the theory. And the supporters all the time are prepared to change these basic assumptions when exposing
it for critics, making it nearly impossible to find out what
the theory stands for.In aim to in some degree enlighten these problems we shall here do a brief analysis of some examples by starting from some basic, original original ideas of the theory.


Einstein's theory says that physical clocks go slower in a system which move compared with clocks in another system, beeing in rest. However, it's not clear if this effect is real (physical clocks really go slower which can be registered by inspection afterwards) or only imaginary (hence beeing only a pseudo effect cuased by that light rays delay the information between the clock and the observer of the clock).That distinction is essential but the supporters of the theory never have
succeeded to make this distincion clear.

Hence, a clock situated on the earth's equator will be slowed down in relation to a clock situated on the north pole (all that in accord with Einstein's own example), but not valid for pendulum clocks or mechanical clocks of some very strange reason (if Einstein's idea has to be taken seriously, the time concept cannot be dependent of what kind of watch is used for its measurement). Even life processes and chemical processes go slower in accord with velocity, an idea which has given rise to the "twin paradox".

For demonstrating the time dilation effect, Einstein suggested two twin brothers where one of them was starting a long journey in space, approaching near the velocity of light and where the other brother reminded on earth. When returning the travelling brother was said to be yonger than his twin brother
staying in rest on earth. But critics has pointed out that, using the relativistic principle, that both brothers have the same moving status, which means, they both have the same right to say they are in rest or they are travelling. This critics has irritated supporters ever since beginning, by reason that it leads to a paradox. The reason for that is simple and easy to understand. The predicted physical effects is namely based solely on the special theory where no consideration has
been taken to the presence of mass, forces and accelerations in the systems. Hence, when only relative movement as active factor is present, it is impossible to determine wether the travelling space ship is moving or the earth is moving. In a physical point of view, the two systems are symmetrical.

Even convinced relativists have realized that dilemma but not drawn the correct consequensed by it, namely that the theory is mad and wrong. They deny precence of a paradox by introducing factors which not were present in the original example.
By saying that the travelling twin brother is more accelerated than the other brother,they insist on they have eliminated the paradox. But by that one have rejected Einstein's own proposal and replaced it by another theory, which we assume, not was the intention.

But even if this works, this way of eliminating the paradox easily can be rejected. If both twin brothers start a jouney at the same time, but in opposite directions, two completely symmetrical systems are achieved. In this case it is not possible to argue for any time dilation effect unregarding if every thinkable physical parameters are included.


During several years atomic clocks have been installed all around the world for many different purposes. These watches are very precice, and if Einstein's prediction was correct,the accumulated differing effect from clocks outplaced on different points on earth easily should be observed. But no such effects have been registered (Einstein predicted differences between a clock placed on the equator and the pole by a factor 1/2.t(v/c)(2) ). No such effect have been registered. But the relativists blame that fact on that the theory of relativity not is valid for rotating movements and that different factors of acceleration and gravitation eliminates the predicted effect.


Length contraction of physical objects as function of relative movement is another meaningless pseudo effect proposed by the theory. The upcome of this idea emanates from Lorentz and Fitzgerald's suggestion of solving a problem in Michelson and Morley's light aether experiment, which contrary prediction gave zero result. The physical motivation to the length contraction effect was that the aether actuated a pressure in the direction of movement pressing parts of the apparatus together.
Obviously, it was this suggestion which inspired Einstein to adopted this idea, but inhibited at the same time the suggested physical reason to it, replacing it by nothing, a meaningless, meaningless nothing.

Experiments have been performed in purpose to verify length contraction, but for obvious reasons that is troublesome because the measuring rod used will contract in the same degree as that object which is subject for measurement. Even convinced relativists have realized that fact, but used it as an argument for that the theory is true. The effect exists but cannot
be detected in your own reference system.

But the length contraction is real if you try to measure a rod belonging another referens system. The reasoning is approximately as follows:

A person in system A is observing
a well known object in system B
and find that the object observed
is shorter compared with the own
reference object.

A system in system B is observing
a well known object in system A
and find that the object observed
is shorter compared with the own
reference object.

If the observed effect was real, there are two possible solutions 1) the effect is purely of imagined nature caused by the fact that the picture of the observed object is distorted by the limited speed of the light rays. 2) The other possible interpretation would be that the effect is of real nature as suggested from the beginning by Lorentz and Fitzgerald's hypothesis.

In the second case the contraction effect would be the same in both systems, hence being irrelevant in a pure physical point of view, and a complete meaningless physical concept. In the first case the effect is pure imaginated and not real. This effect can be motivated by the fact that information consume time, hence giving rise to distortion of the observed object.
But such effects can be considerated and predicted by ordinary classic theory, the theory of relativity is not necessary.


One of the most strange and perverse results of the theory is how the concept of an event is treated. The theory says that a single event not is simultaneous for two observers who move with different velocities in relation to the observed event.

That may be interpreted in two different ways. In the same way as we interpreted time dilation and length contraction one of the alternative is to interpret the effect just as a distortion effect caused by that light consume time for transmitting the information of the event, the other interpretation is that the event really is equivalent with two separate events.

The first interpretation may be acceptable in a physical point of view, but being only an illusive effect. But there is still only one event for both the observers, they only apprehend the event on two different times.

In the other interpretation we override the border of what we regard as normal science. The idea that the same event would be different events dependent of who is the observer is absurd and lacking reality. To give an extreme and some absurd example : The US president J.F.Kennedy was murdered by a shoot in Dallas the 22th of november 1963. If someone would imply this murder was many murders,one murder for each single person
who heard of this event, he should be regarded as a complete idiot. Obviously not Einstein and his supporters do that.


Another remarkable effect of relativity is that velocities not can be added arithmetically. If for instance two cars drive on a road with 100 km/hour each, but in different directions, the relative velocity between them will be 200 km/hour, that in accord with normal calculations. In the relativity theory,that is correct with good accuracy for low velocities, but not for very hight velocities. Because the maximum velocity possible to define is limited to , c ,the velocity of light, Einstein was forced to construct an artificial formula which gave this limit as awaited by the theory.
Of course all that is pure fiction, constructed results having the only motivation that Einstein's theory claim it. The idea serve no purpose and deserve not to be taken seriously.


As here discussed before in examining this theory, the mass increasing phenomenon, if interpreted as such effect, was discovered by experiment with cathode rays so early as in 1901.
Hence, the phenomenon was not predicted by the theory of relativity but was enclosed in the theory some years later. Before that several other scientists had developed the experimental results as well as presented matemathical expressions for it being the same as in Einstein's theory. The physical reason to the mass increase phenomenon may be discussed, but there is no
reason to interpret it as a effect of relativistic concepts.
The effect only has been registered when accelerating elementary particles in particle accelerators, so the most probable reason is that the effect is of electromagnetic nature. There is no reason that a rocket in free space, for instance, drived forwards by its own force, should increase its mass.
No matter the reason to this phenomenon,we can be sure of that this effect has nothing with relativity to do. Those theoretical formulae derived to the greatest extent is built on classic Newtonian laws of mass, energy and force, parameters not contained in the origin theory of relativity.


When an ambulance passes a person standing still on the street,the listener will register a rising tone when the ambulance approaches and a falling tone when it recedes. The phenomenon is named " Doppler effect " after the discover Christian Doppler.The effect is created by that sound propagates through a medium, air. But even for light there are similar registerable effects, indicated by that the wavelength is displaced
in direction of blue when the source approach and displaced against red in the posite case. Einstein's supporters mean that it is an easy task to explain the effect within the conceptual framework of the theory. But sorry to say, the arguments here is weak as usual. They think that the doppler shift has the same cause as for sound in air, but it cannot be. The reason for that is that light has no aether to move in (as for sound in air). So the doppler/sound/air model doesn't work.
And the theory of relativity doesn't confess any light aether.
The only remaining reason to the equivalent doppler shift isthat the light velocity is effected by the relative velocity between source and observer, but then the theory once time for all must be rejected as invalid. It's easy to understand that few are prepared to take this step.


In Einstein's theory the gravitation is no real force, just a curvature in space and time. For instance, if a planet moves round the sun, it is not actuated by a force but follows a track in the space_time continuum according to the least resistance law. In this perspective one can wonder why an object being in rest strives to move in a direction towards the gravitating center. In spite of that Einstein say that there is no force acting, a mass can press a steel spring together,then letting the spring do a work. The conclusion is that no energy (force times distance) is needed when pressing the spring together but that energy is developed afterwards. In this way Einstein's theory has overtrumped the energy reserving law, which means that energy can be created from nothing. We can be very sure that is impossible, no physical experiments has overtrumped the energy preserving law. So, once again we have noted that Einstein's theory not pass through a simple logical

Messaggio orinale: