The Shortest Embarrassing Papers on Special Relativity. 9/12

2006

Controversies arise when specialists disagree on some particular issue. This normally occurs in any scientific brunch. We analyze some controversies, which have a good cause in Special Relativity. The paper does not question Special Relativity Theory but it challenges changing deeply held academic beliefs about imaginary experiments in Special Relativity Theory.

The special theory of relativity has been honored with high interpretations about human mental performance for more than a century and it played a role in increasing interest in science. With the improvement of methodology and its becoming more competent, the flaws of the theory and its superficial analyzing became transparent, and in its 200 th anniversary it became the case for the error file in the history of science. Through this widely known example, this study summarizes the reasons why humanity is deceived oneself while searching for reality.

The Tragic History of Theoretical Physics

This article contains no mathematical concepts, since this article is primarily intended for non-scientists. The reason is that mainstream physicists are not likely to read dissident papers because they are deeply indoctrinated by the relativity dogma. Today theoretical physics is in a bad state as indicated by paradoxes and other absurdities. A critical analysis of special relativity seems to be needed, and this article discusses development of physics over a period of about 140 years.

The speed of light postulate is closely examined from the perspective of two inertial reference frames―unprimed (‘stationary’) and primed (‘traveling’)―in relative motion, revealing that the speed of light postulate actually requires length contraction with respect to the unprimed reference frame, and length expansion with respect to the primed frame. It is shown that when symmetry is imposed on the inverse length transformation (i.e., to make it exhibit the same length contraction from the perspective of the primed frame), the common length contraction factor becomes nothing but the Lorentz contraction factor .  However, this would necessarily result in  1, implying that the frames are being at rest with respect to each other, and thus refuting the special relativity predictions! When the coordinate’s transformation symmetry assumption is applied on the direct transformation resulting from the light speed postulate―which is shown incompatible with this assumption―, the Lorentz transformation and its inverse are erroneously obtained; it is shown to be restricted to certain coordinate relations, resulted in mathematical contradictions, and thus demonstrated to be unviable.

The wide availability of information has led to the fact that students are well aware of the difficulties of existing physical theories. In this article we analyze some logical paradoxes of the special relativity theory (SRT), concerning the time dilation and length contraction. The Lorentz transformations and the relativistic law for velocity addition are considered in detail. The notion of relativity and the transverse Doppler effect are discussed. The whole complex of numerous paradoxes in the special theory of relativity worries us by further complications.

Controversies arise when specialists disagree on some particular issue. This normally occurs in any scientific brunch. We analyze some controversies, which have a good cause in Special Relativity. The paper does not question Special Relativity Theory but it challenges changing deeply held academic beliefs about imaginary experiments in Special Relativity Theory. PACS 03.30.+p

Draft of a reflection on Einstein's special theory of relativity, by a nonspecialist. Excerpted from a longer essay on modern physics.

2024

This is a completely remade, revised and corrected version of a draft uploaded about two years ago. In the present work I intend to provide a concise guide about the development of the Tocharian vowel system with emphasis on how the system behaves as a whole for each stage of its development in a typologically natural fashion. Introducing novel hypotheses is not the main goal here but the display of the main changes instead, with focus on every step, providing examples and explanations on how each change affects the vowel system and to improve what is already stated on the matter. This last update recognizes the difference between non umlauting -o:n and umlauting -eh2-o:n stems, the split between -eh2 and -yeh2 stems and the requirement of a long root vowel for the IV presents.