Relativity?? $50,000(US) Awards for mathematical Proof
"...You
may fool all of the people some of the time; you can even fool some of
the people all the time; but you can't fool all of the people all of
the
time." Abraham Lincoln
This author has no intention of accusing relativity
of
being motivated to fool people. The point of quoting Lincoln's famous
words
here is to say that anything that deviates from truth must have its day
in which its erroneous nature is unveiled.
Relativity Mathematically Fails!
(Copyright © 1996 by Cameron Y. Rebigsol)
Awards of up to US.$50,000.00
each are hereby offered by the author, Cameron Y. Rebigsol, of this web
site to people who can successfully defend Relativity  the most
dominating
theory in physics  in mathematical terms, and thus disprove the
mathematical
arguments made against relativity shown in Rebigsol's text MATHEMATICAL
INVALIDITY OF RELATIVITY published at this web site.
This web sits hosts 3 papers that challenges 3 most
popular
beliefs that dominate the modern physcs:
1. RELATIVITY, CONDTRADICTIONS AND CONFUSIONS
This paper will reveal the mathematical invalidity of relativity and
explore
in mathematical terms how relativity has been fallaciously formulated.
2. MATHEMATICAL DEMONSTRATION ON HUBBLE'S LAW
This paper differs itself from the belief that is preached by the Big
Bang
Theory and is able to unify all major astronomical observations
in
one systematic explanation.
3. DIFFERENT VIEWS ON THE FORMATION OF THE SOLAR
SYSTEM Any explanation of the formation of the
solar
system must be coherent with, but not contradicting to, the
explanation
about the evolution of the universe. Therefore, the solar
system
cannot have been the remnant of a single cloud, but a community
consisted
of members coming from various remote locations in the boundless
universe billions of years ago.
A visitor can just click on the titles in the following to get to
each
paper.
MATHEMATICAL
INVALIDITY OF RELATIVITY (The
US.$50,000.00
award
paper)
Relativity has no respect to nature. Its
"success" relies on many irresponsible assertions and on the violation
of many rules of mother nature, both in mathematics and physics.
*Relativity “predicts” that no speed addition could result in a speed
that will exceed the speed of light. By the same exact
mathematical demonstration, however, relativity must lead us to
conclude that any
object is destined to move at the speed of
light, and at the speed of light only, regardless.
* The Lorentzian transformation equations are actually a "solution"
set of an equation set whose individual equations are contradicting to
each other.
* Special
relativity
affirms one speed limit in nature, which is the speed of light in
vacuum
space, but general relativity precisely rejects
it, and, with equation, further establishes another speed limit, which
is the speed of light at the mass
center
of a gravity body!
* General relativity is here shown totally incompetent in explaining
the movement of the heavenly objects.
* The famous twin paradox should have never been there to make people
feel mystified; it lacks any validity to puzzle people right at its
birth.
It has only the same mental value as the following "paradoxes":
Paradox one: General relativity claims that it
"discovers"
( circumference/diameter)>3.1415926... for a spinning circle.
With
the method it advocates, however, calculation shows (
circumference/diameter)<3.1415926...
for the same spinning circle.
Paradox two: It has been overwhelmingly announced that Newton's
Third Law must be subordinated to relativity in accuracy. At the
same time, however, with its own mathematics, relativity
"confirms"
that the accuracy of Newton's Third Law is indisputable.
Paradox three: 1= 0.2= 0, 0.6=0.48,
3=5=2 ,... all can be derived with relativity!
Paradox four: Relativity claims that light in vacuum space
possesses
the maximum speed in nature, then it uses this speed to claim, with
equation,
that speed of light at the mass center of a gravity body to be the
highest
in nature.
Paradox five: A homogeneous gravitational field, a term
"invented"
by relativity, must be interpreted as a homogeneously inhomogeneous
field
by the same theory; the supposed existing homogeneity is exactly
rejected
and proven nonexisting by the same theory that advocates it.
A special challenge for relativity: What
is the definition of speed and how should it be expressed in
mathematical
terms?
2. MATHEMATICAL
DEMONSTRATION ON HUBBLE'S LAW
Hubbles’s Law is shown potentially existing, both in mathematical terms
and physical deduction in this paper. However, the potential
existence
of Hubble's Law is by no means a support to the Big Bang Theory.
On the contrary, its existence contradicts the believes that lead to
the
formulation of the Big Bang Theory. This paper also offers
answers
to
1. The energy source of rotation of all rotational galaxies,
2. The reason of the coexistence of red shift and blue shift of
celestial
objects,
3. Why distribution of heavenly objects appearing in layers,
4. The reason of the isotropic characteristics of background noise
and its mathematical limit.
After all, the cosmological model presented in this paper also offers
a consistent explanation about the formation of the solar system and
the
various phenomena observed with respect to the solar system.
**Before you start reading this paper,
please answer to yourself this question: What is the reason for a train
to move away from a station? You may say the reason is the train
running on the railroad track. The Bing Bang supporters will say
you are wrong, but the reason is that the track is expanding in length.
3. DIFFERENT
VIEWS ON THE FORMATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM
As a coherent extension of the idea concerning the above cosmological
model, this paper presents the explanation to the following:
1. Where each member of the system came from and why the outer planets
get far more satellites than the inner planets,
2. Why Venus has a retrograding spinning while rotating in the same
orbital direction as the other planets,
3. Why the Sun possesses so little angular momentum in the system while
having concentrated so much mass of this system,
4. Why the Moon must face the Earth with the same side all the time
and why this side must also be full of maria (frozen lava),
5. The periodicity of the sunspot activity,
6. Why, as a spinning body of fluid, the Sun appears perfectly
spherical
and it has differential rotation,
7. Why Earth had its magnetic field reversed several times in her
history.
To win the awards of maximumUS.$50,000.00
each,
all you have to do is to examine the arguments in the text MATHEMATICAL
INVALIDITY OF RELATIVITY at
this web site and then spend some time to disprove Rebigsol's
calculations.
Details regarding how a paper to be qualified in presenting arguments
against
Rebigsol's calculations for the awards are listed at the end of the
simplified
versions of both of the following papers: (The materials contained in
the
following papers, unless where specified by this author, do not belong
to the text of MATHEMATICAL INVALIDITY OF RELATIVITY)
1. MATHEMATICAL
DEMONSTRATION ON HUBBLE'S LAW
2. DIFFERENT
VIEWS ON THE FORMATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM
For more articles containing theoretical and factual
disagreement
with relativity, Rebigsol suggests the following web sites.
Although Rebigsol found some outstanding argument or facts against
relativity
in each of these pages, it does not necessarily mean that Rebigsol has
agreed on every point of view from them.
Sapere
Aude!, by G Walton
Special Relativity~Physics,
by W. Babin
PYTHAGOREAN
PHYSICS , By Todd Matthews Kelso
The
GPS and the Velocity of Light , Paul
Marmet
DISPROVING
RELATIVITY, by Pawel Kolasa
Revolution in
Modern
Physics ,by John Hatman
You are visitor:
Comments are welcome.
