wandelaar

Relativity Theory - For Serious Study

Recommended Posts

I was happy to see so much serious interest and well reasoned posts in the other topic about general relativity theory. But as that topic is about the question whether or not general relativity is a pseudoscience this topic is for questions and answers on the content of Einstein's two theories of relativity. No scientist worth his salt claims that scientific theories are eternal truths. And the same holds for relativity theory, it is the best we have at the moment. But in all probability still better theories will be found in the future. However that may be, the study of relativity theory is still very interesting in its own right. And that is why I have opened this topic. Those who want to dispute the status of relativity theory as a scientific theory may lay their eggs in the other topic... :P

 

 

Edited by wandelaar
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been some discussion on the photon sphere in the other topic. Now the photon sphere is a very subtle concept. See:

 

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/25657/black-hole-photon-sphere

https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/47buvf/is_it_possible_for_photons_to_have_a_stable_orbit/

 

And: 

 

Quote

There are no stable free fall orbits that exist within or cross the photon sphere. Any free fall orbit that crosses it from the outside spirals into the black hole. Any orbit that crosses it from the inside escapes to infinity.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon_sphere

 

 

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a big Einstein fan, but I have my own private theory.  I think that General Relativity could potentially be extended from the solar system level, where it works extremely well, to the intergalactic level, in which it completely fails (without invoking Dark Matter and Dark Energy as kluges).  I think my theory can cover both scales, without the need for the kluges.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Otis

 

I have looked at the video, and I have some questions about it. But as this topic is about Einstein's relativity theories and not about any alternatives, I will ask you to open another topic about your own theory. Then we can discuss your theory in your own topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Einstein said: "I did not ban the 'quantum ether', but I do not want it to have mechanical properties." Now, if you remove the mechanical notion, then I see no harm in reintroducing the notion of the subquantum medium. But it has got to be a medium which is much subtler than a mechanical medium. Indeed, I believe, there is some deeper underlying process that we have not begun to understand yet. " 

see Quantum professor Basil J. Hiley, 2016: Quantum Trajectories: Dirac, Moyal and Bohm

Professor Basil J. Hiley in email response to me: 

 

Quote

" I always felt the chances that a universal rest frame existed were very small. ... Today it is called 'non-commutative geometry’.  In my view this demands a radical new view as to what geometry actually is.  Things do not go on in space-time but space-time itself emerges from the non-commutative algebra of process." .

 

So the ether has already been proven by science - in the lab - empirically! The future does change the past!

nj469881f2_online.jpg&key=e4bf487ec45b5a

Quote


..What seems to have been forgotten or not recognised was that Dirac already had the Bohm equation in his "Principles of Quantum Mechanics‚ÄĚ because the equations are simply a different mathematical form of Schr√∂dinger‚Äôs equation.¬† What I have shown recently is that the Bohm trajectories are the mean of an ensemble of individual Feynman paths.¬†

 

See Flack, R. and  Hiley, B. J.,  Feynman Paths and Weak Values, in  Entropy, 20 (5) May 2018.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites