# Abstract

A theory of relativity is presented, which is physical, in contrast to Einstein’s special theory of relativity, which is non-physical.

**The theory of relativity worked out by Mr. Einstein, which is in the domain of natural science, I believe can also be applied to the political field. Both democracy and human rights are relative concepts – and not absolute and general.**(Jiang Zemin President of the People’s Republic of China 1993 – 2003, Chairman of the Central Military Commission 1989 – 2004)

## Theories of Relativity

This knol connects to the knols:

- Did Einstein Not Understand Mathematics?
- Is One Dollar = One Euro?
- Does the Earth Rotate?
- Scientists and Science in Cartoons.

### The End of Physics: No Unified Field Theory

### Relativity Theory as Root of Trouble

**non-physical theory**belonging to epistemology without significance for the real physical world. Today 100 years later, it is considered to be a corner stone of modern physics, but the initial scepticism and criticism has not been eliminated by reason, only by politics of science and coersion.

### The Nature of Mathematics

### Einstein´s Special Theory of Relativity

Einstein´s special theory of relativity formulated in 1905 concerns observations of motion by different observers moving with constant velocity with respect to each other. It is based on the following two assumptions:

(E1) all observers measure the same the speed of light

- (E2)
there is no aether.

An** **aether ** **would be a medium for the propagation of light, which would have the same function as the medium of air for the propagation of sound. The special theory came out from experiments by Michelson and Morley in the late 19th century indicating that

- (MM)
detecting an aether medium common to all observers is impossible.

Einstein was led to his special theory in an attempt to handle the apparent contradiction between (E1) and (MM). To see the contradiction, compare with different observers moving through still/motionless air with different velocities, who **can agree on the same speed of sound ****if they only compensate** for their velocities with respect to still/motionless air, that is, **if they compensate for their different ****air-winds.**

So Michelson and Morley expected a compensation of the measured speed of light to be necessary depending on the motion of an observer, but **could not detect that compensation was necessary**. In other words, they **could not detect any** **aether-wind **in the motion of** the Earth around the Sun with varying velocity (direction). It seemed that there was no still aether or no fixed vacuum through which light could propagate with a certain velocity. This was the contradiction which had to be resolved. **

Einstein´s solution was radical: **remove the aether/vacuum completely** from the picture and thus replace (MM) by (E2). If there is no aether, there is no contradiction coming from variable motion through an aether without aether-wind, simply because there is no aether. Clever!?

We shall see below that this is too radical, resulting in a **non-physical** **special theory,** which does not describe any physical reality. We shall see that the special theory is a (trivial) **purely mathematical theory without physical interpretation.** This was understood by Einstein, who quickly left the special theory (and never returned) and instead raised the bet to his general theory of relativity, which is so difficult that nobody can understand it.

## Many-Minds Relativity

There is another less radical resolution, which is to handle (MM) by accepting that **different observers**

**can have different aethers/vacui,**which was suggested in 1914 by the British mathematician Ebenezer Cunningham.

**physical relativity theory**, which we refer to as many-minds relativity [4], based on the following assumptions:

- (M1)
all observers agree on the same the speed of light

- (M2)
each observer has his own aether/vaccum in which he does not move.

In Einstein’s special relativity, there is no aether/vacuum, because observers cannot agree on a common aether/vacuum, while in many-minds Relativity different observers are allowed to have different aethers/vacui. To have nothing is not physical, to have something can be physical.

Einstein’s approach resembles the debate climate in Sweden, where an opinion is possible only if it is shared by everybody, which is an extreme form of democracy and can result in no opinion at all. On the other hand, many-minds relativity resembles the culture in France, where everybody is allowed (expected) to have a different opinion, which does not contradict common agreement to some extent.

We will below present both Einstein’s non-physical special relativity based on (E1)+(E2), and different forms of physical many-minds relativity based on more precise versions of (M1)+(M2) connecting mathematical theory to physics.

We shall then understand that (M1) really is an agreement to measure length in lightseconds, and thus is simply a definition, and we shall then understand that (E1) is also a definition expressed a little bit differently. If now (E1) is a definition and (E2) a negative statement, then there is no physical content of the special theory, since it is based solely on (E1)+(E2), and thus special relativity is a non-physical theory without physical relevance, which was understood by Einstein, although he kept it for himself.

#### Propagation of Sound

**speed of sound**is about 340 meter/second, and the frequency of audible sound ranges from about 20 periods/second to about 20.000 periods/second.

**changing the perceived frequency from 1 to 1/(1 – v) if the source is approaching an ear at rest in the air with the speed v, and to 1/(1+v) if the sound source is receeding from the ear at speed v. Altogether with the**

**Doppler factor**

1/(1 + v)

if we count v negative in approach and positive in recession.

**wave equation,**properly modified according to the air-wind. The

**wave equation**thus

**takes different forms for different observers**moving with respect to each other and with different velocitites with respact to the air.

### The SI Standard of Measuring Time and Length

Physics of motion is based on measuring time and length. According to the 1983 SI Standard, time is measured in seconds according to an atomic cesium clock showing Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) with

**one second****equal****to 9192631770 cycles of a****cesium clock**

**meters**with

**one meter being the distance traveled by light in 0.000000003335640952 seconds or 9192631770/299792458 cycles of a cesium clock.**

**lightsecond**or 299792458 meters.

The constancy of the speed of light is an agreement or definition

*This hypothesis of Lorentz and Fitz-Gerald (space contraction) will appear most extraordinary at first sight. All that can be said in its favor at the moment is that it is merely the immediate interpretation of Michelson’s experimental result, if we define distances by the time taken by light to traverse them.*

Poincare: *Use the 1983 SI length standard of lightsecond!*

**is**constant as a physical fact, but this is not science. It is not allowed in science to view a definition as a physical fact, because a definition can be chosen at will (as long as it is not self-contradictory), while a physical fact cannot. See the discussion of the Michelson-Morley experiment below .

### Assumptions of Many-Minds Relativity

The assumptions of Many-Minds Relativity take the more precise form:

- (M1)
**all observers use identical cesium clocks and measure length in lightseconds** - (M2)
**each observer uses Maxwell´s equations in a vacuum to which he is a rest.**

Note that (M2) means that Maxwells equations take the same form for all observers, in contrast

**coordination of observations by different observers**. If there is just one observer, there is no need for coordination, but if there are several there is.

### Specific Assumptions of Many-Minds Relativity

v

**frequency**f of light from an object Y moving along L, and we assume that the frequency f is related to the

**velocity**v of Y relative to X by the above

**Doppler shift formula**

f = 1/(1+v) or 1+v=1/f or v=1/f - 1,

**red-shifted,**and from approaching stars is

**blue-shifted.**Observations of far away stars show redshift corresponding to v>1. Far away galaxies appear to race away from us with a speed exceeding the speed of light.

v1 f1 v2 f2

**composite Doppler shift formula:**

f12=f1f2 and v12 = 1/f12 – 1

**composing or adding velocities:**

v12 = v1 + v2 + v1v2.

**second order consistent**in the mutual velocity v12. This means that if X1 uses the formula v1 = v12 – v2 – v12v2 to compute v1 from v12 and -v2, and X2 the corresponding formula v2=v12 – v1 -v12v1, then they will agree up to a term v12v12. The relative velocity v12 between human observers can only be small with v12v12 very small, while v1 and v2 can be large and even exceed the speed of light in recession.

### A Relativistic Newton’s 2nd Law

#### Differentiating the velocity composition v12 = v1 + v2 + v1v2 with v1 constant and v2 a velocity increment satisfying Newton´s second law mdv2/dt = F, where m is the mass of Y and F the force applied to Y, gives dv12/dt=(1+v1)dv2/dt=(1+v1)F/m so that setting v1=v12=v since v2 is an increment, we obtain the following **relativistic Newton’s 2nd Law:**

mv dv/dt = F where mv = m/(1

_{ }+v)

**relativistic mass corrected with the factor 1/(1+v).**We see that in approach the relativistic mass increases and in recession it decreases. We understand that the apparent change of mass depends on the way we measure and compose velocities. In a coordinate system following the body, the apparent mass m does not change, only in a coordinate system not following the body.

### What is Relativistic Mass?

### An Illuminating Example

Assume Y has mass m = 1 and is accellerated towards X at O with a constant force F = -1 from rest at a position s(0) > 0 at t = 0. From Newton’ s 2nd Law dv/(1+v) = -dt, we find v(t) = exp(- t) -1, showing that

### E=mc2 or P = mc

**mass as a potential contribution to momentum**. This suggests the following variant of Einstein’s famous E=mc2:

P = mc

### The Michelson-Morley Experiment Today

Suppose you want to check the Michelson-Morley experiment today. You would then measure the speed of

## Einstein’s Special Theory Relativity

### The Lorentz Transformation

#### Einstein´s Special Theory of Relativity is based on (E1) and (E2) supposedly leading to the **Lorentz transformation **

**x’ = g**

**( x – vt )**

**t’ = g ( t – vx )**

where g2 = 1/(1-v2) with g > 0, which connects the coordinates of two coordinate systems (x,t) and (x’ ,t’ )

**non-physical,**which can be seen from

**the x’ – axis is not parallel to the x – axis**, in contradiction to physical situtation considered, where X is an observer with an x-axis and X’ and observer with an x’ -axis moving along the x-axis with speed v.

**should not be interpreted as physical time .**

**length contraction**and

**time dilation,**and the question from

**if these effects are real physical effects or just mathematical conventions/definitions/agreements**.

### Einstein’s Principle of Relativity

**principle pf relativity**of the form

- (E2′)
physical laws take the same form in different (non-accellerating) coordinate systems.

**all**physical laws should behave like Maxwell’s equations, that take the same mathematical form in different coordinate system, is non-sensical. It is also a truism that the physical meaning of a physical law is independent of the coordinate system used. This is the same as saying that the meaning of a sentence is independent of the language used to express it. Thus (E2′) is either non-sensical or a truism without physical content.

### Einstein’s Equivalence Principle

**inertial mass,**with

**the inertial mass by**

**gravitational mass,**since gravitational mass is defined by gravitational acceleration

**. This means that Einstein´s principle of equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass is nothing but a definition, another indication that Einstein´s special relativity is non-physical.**

### Einstein’s Special Relativity is Non-Physical

*Length contraction and time dilation are ways of regarding things and do not correspond to physical reality.*(Born)

*A transformation of the time was necessary. So I introduced the conception of a local time which is different for all systems of reference which are in motion relative to each other. But I never thought that this had anything to do with real time. This real time for me was still represented by the old classical notion of an absolute time, which is independent of any reference to special frames of coordinates. There existed for me only this true time. I considered my time transformation only as a heuristic working hypothesis.*(Lorentz)

*Poincare never spells out how he interpretes the primed coordinates in the Lorentz transformation….and like Lorentz believes in local time….*(Sartori)

*The question whether the Lorentz contraction does or does not exist is confusing. It does not really exist in so far as it does not exist for an observer who moves (with the rod); it really exists, however, in the sense that it can as a matter of principle be demonstrated by a resting observer.*(Einstein)

- ...
*the general theory of relativity. The name is repellent. Relativity? I have never been able to understand what the word means in this connection. I used to think that this was my fault, some flaw of my intelligence, but it is now apparent that nobody ever understood it, probably not even Einstein himself.*(Synge)

*Thus we can sum up: general relativity can not be physical, and physical relativity is not general.*(Fock)

*Many people probably felt relieved when told that the true nature of the world could not be understood except by Einstein and a few other geniuses who were able to think in four dimensions. They had tried to understand science, but now it was evident that science was something to believe in, not something which should be understood.*(Hannes Alfven, Swedish Nobel Laurate in physics)

*Time and space are modes in which we think and not conditions in which we live.*(Einstein)

*In 1905 Einstein recognized that Lorentz contractions and local time were not mathematical devices and physical illusions but involved the very concepts of space and time.*(Born)

*It is hardly possible to illustrate Einstein’s kinematics by means of models.*(Born)

*It is certainly remarkable that these relativity concepts, also those concerning time, have found such rapid acceptance.*(Lorentz)

### How Smart was Einstein Really?

There are many stories and cartoons joking with the stupidity of Einstein as the smartest physicist ever, who could not understand much, in particular not relativity theory:

- In 1931 Charlie Chaplin invited Einstein, who was visiting Hollywood, to a private screening of his new film City Lights. As the two men drove into town together, passersby waved and cheered. Chaplin turned to his guest and explained: “
*The people are applauding you because none of them understands you, and applauding me because everybody understands me.”*

- Scientific American once ran a competition offering several thousand dollars for the best explanation of Einstein’s general theory of relativity in three thousand words.
*“I am the only one in my entire circle of friends who is not entering,”*Einstein ruefully remarked.*“I don’t believe I could do it”.*

### Can Anybody Understand Relativity?

*The relativity of space and time is a startling conclusion. I have known about it for more than 25 years, but even so, whenever I quitely sit and think it through, I am amazed.**It is not the depth of mathematics that makes Einstein’s special relativity challenging. It is the degree to which the ideas are foreign and apparently inconsistent with our everyday experience.*

We understand that physicists do not understand relativity, but the mere fact of not understanding is taken as evidence that the theory is correct. If you could understand the theory you would understand that it is pseudo-science without significance to physics, but since you cannot understand the theory, you can only accept it as a profound truth beyond human understanding and rationality.