"All the World's a Stage We Pass Through" R. Ayana

Monday 16 May 2011

Einstien's Relativity Error

Einstien's Relativity Error


by Stan Deyo



The physical sciences in 1873 seemed to once again take on an air of stability as James Clerk Maxwell published his, 'Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism'. 

In this paper he discussed electricity, magnetism, and electro-magnetism as functions of waves in a fluid space (ether). His theory held popular support until the year 1887 when the two U.S. physicists, A.A. Michelson and Edward W. Morley performed their historic experiment with light. Their experiment (the 'Michelson-Morley Experiment') was designed to use light as a means to determine if space were a 'fluid' as Maxwell's equations had assumed. 

The 'M-M' test results, however, appeared to deny the existence of fluid (or ether) space. To explain the 'apparent' failure of the M-M test to detect the ether, Hendrik Lorentz and George Fitzgerald developed their now famous 'transforms' (the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transforms - 1902) in which length contractions, mass increase, and time lag were offered as explanation for the negative test result. Note that the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transforms still treated space as an inertial fluid... one undetectable by known technology. 

Einstein, who first began the formulation of his special Theory of Relativity in 1895, published it in 1905. He seized upon the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transforms and the M-M test results as evidence of a universal axiom: the velocity of light is (to the observer) the limit measurable velocity in the universe (this does not mean it is the limit velocity in the universe, however.)


Einstein was faced with an apparent paradox as to the nature of space. It behaved like a fluid in many ways - yet in others it behaved like an abstract, ten-component Ricci Tensor from the Reimannian model of the Universe. The failure of the M-M test to detect an aether was the final straw. Yet, hard as he tried, Einstein failed to remove the "aether" from E = mc2 The following discussion should illustrate this point:
Diagram 1 is a schematic of the M-M test. It was conducted on the basis that if an aether existed, the earth would by moving through it. Hence, there would be a relative velocity between earth and the fluid of space.
[Diagram 1 temprorarily corrupted]
It was reasoned that by splitting a beam of light (F) into two parts; sending one out and back in-line with the direction of earth's orbital path, (to mirror (A) from half-silvered mirror (G)); sending the other at right angles to the direction of earth's orbital path (to mirror (B) through half-silvered mirror (G) and glass plate (D)); and recombining the two beams in the interferometer (E) one should be able to detect a shift in the phases of the two beams relative to one another.
This shift could be accurately predicted by knowing the velocity of light (c) and the velocity (ve) of earth through orbital space. Their reasoning was as follows (refer diag.1, diag.2a, diag.2b): 


= velocity of ether wind or drift

= velocity of light

= velocity from G to B by fixed extra-terrestrial observer

= distance GA = GB

= go-return time in-line (GA-AG)

= go-return time at right angles (GB-BG)

= .5t2

= apparent velocity from G to B by earth observer
Then the time (t1) is determined by: [s/(c-ve)]+[s/(c+ve)] = t1 which reduces to:

2sc/(c2-ve2) = t1
Also, the time (t2) is determined by first solving for (v1) in terms of (c) and (ve) using the Pythagorean Theorum (c2=a2+b2)... or, in this instance: (G to B)2=(G to M)2+(M to B)2.
by substitution,    c2 = ve2+v12

v1 = (c2-ve2).5
Now, solving for the time (t) - which is the same over GM, GB, MB - of the GB trip by substituting s/t = v1 in (Eq.2) , one obtains:

s/t = (c2-ve2).5

t = s/(c2-ve2).5
substituting:    t=.5t2
gives:    t2/2 = s/(c2-ve2).5

t2 = 2s/(c2-ve2).5
by comparing the ratio of the in-line go-return time (t1) to the right angle go-return time (t2) one obtains:

t1/t2 = [2sc/(c2-ve2)][(c2-ve2).5/2s]
which reduces to:

t1/t2 = (1-ve2/c2)-.5
Now then, if the light source is at rest with respect to the ether, one sees:

ve = 0

t1/t2 = 1/(1-0).5 = 1/1 = 1
Such a ratio as (Eq.7) shows is exactly what every successive try of the linear M-M test has obtained... (notice: linear not angular). Lorentz and Fitzgerald knew there had to be an aether; so they developed their well-known transforms - an act which was in essence a way of saying, there has to be an ether... we'll adjust our observed results by a factor which will bring our hypothetical expectations and our test results into accord... Their whole transform was based on the existence of ether space! Their transform, in essence, said that length shortened, mass flattened, and time dilated as a body moved through the ether; hence it was possible to detect the ether.
Einstein came along in 1905 saying the Michelson-Morley test showed the velocity of light to be a universal constant to the observer. Seizing upon this and the Lorentz-Fitzgerald transforms, Einstein was able to formulate his Special Relativity which resulted in the now famous E=Mc2 ... the derivation of which follows:
Starting with (Eq.5):     t1/t2=(1-ve2/c2)-.5
The Lorentz-Fitzgerald transform factor for (Eq.5) becomes (1-ve2/c2).5 (to bring t2=t1) giving t1/t2 an observed value of (1).
Assuming Lorentz and Fitzgerald's supposition to be correct, one should look at mass-in-motion as the observer on the mass sees it versus mass-in-motion as the universal observer sees it....

let m1
= mass as it appears to riding observer

let v1
= velocity as detected by rider

let m2
= mass as universal observer sees it

let v2
= velocity as universal observer sees it
then it follows (from Lorentz and Fitzgerald) that:

m1v1 not= m2v2 (to either observer)
So, to equate the two products, Lorentz and Fitzgerald devised their transform factor (1-ve2/c2).5 which would bring m1v1=m2v2 to either observer,... yielding the following extension:
since,... v1 = s1/t1 and v2 = s2/t2 (assuming time is reference)

m1s1/t1 not =m2s2/t1

m1s1 not= m2s2
then, by substitution of the transform factor s2=s1(l-ve2/c2).5 (assuming time is reference) into (Eq. 10) one obtains: m1s1 = m2s1(1-ve2/c2).5 which reduces to:

To re-evaluate this relative change in mass, one should investigate the expanded form of the transform factor: (1 - ve2/c2)-.5 (which transforms t1=t2) .It is of the general binomial type:

Hence, it can be expressed as the sum of an infinite series:

1+ab+a(a+1)b2/2!+a(a+1)(a+2)b3/3!+... etc
where:    b2 is less than 1
So, setting...    a=.5    and b=ve2/c2
one obtains:

1+(ve2/2c2)+(3ve4/8c4)+(5ve6/16c6)+... etc
For low velocities in the order of .25c and less the evaluation of (1-ve2/c2).5 is closely approximated by, the first two elements of (Eq. 14):

so, (Eq.ll) becomes:

m2=m1(1+ve2/c2) (where ve less than .25c)
developing further,... m2=m1+m1ve2/2c2

Remembering energy (E) is represented by:

E=.5mv2(where ve less than .25c)
One can substitute (Eq.18) into (Eq.17) giving...

m2-m1=E/c2 (assuming ve = v)
Representing the change in mass (m2-m1)by M gives:

or, in the more familiar form using the general (m) for (M):

(Note, however, that equation (14) should be used for the greatest accuracy - especially where ve is greater than .25c)
Looking at the assumption in (Eq. 19)...(ve) was the term used in the beginning to represent the ether wind velocity... This means Einstein used fluid space as a basis for Special Relativity. His failing was in declaring the velocity of light an observable limit to the velocity of any mass when it should only have been the limit to any observable electromagnetic wave velocity in the ether. The velocity of light is only a limit velocity in the fluid of space where it is being observed. If the energy-density of space is greater or less in another part of space, then the relativistic velocity of light will pass up and down through the reference light wave velocity limit - if such exists.
Do not fall into the trap of assuming that this fluid space cannot have varying energy-density. Perhaps, the reader is this very moment saying, an incompressible fluid space does not allow concentrations of energy - but he is wrong - dead wrong!
When a fixed-density fluid is set in harmonic motion about a point or centre, the number of masses passing a fixed reference point per unit time can be observed as increased mass (or concentrated energy). Although the density (mass per volume) is constant, the mass-velocity product yields the illusion of more mass per volume per time. Space is an incompressible fluid of varying energy density... in this author's opinion.
The apparent absurdity of infinitely-increasing-mass and infinitely-decreasing-length as a mass approaches the light-wave velocity is rationalized by realizing that space has inertia and as such offers inertial resistance to the moving mass. The energy of the moving mass is transmitted in front of it into the medium of space. The resulting curl of inertial resistance increases as negative momentum to the extent the mass is converted to radiant energy as it meets its own reflected mass in resistance. However, to the Star Trek fans, take heart... just as man broke the sound-velocity limit (sound barrier) he can also break the light-velocity limit (light barrier). By projecting a high-density, polarized field of resonating electrons to spoil or warp the pressure wave of the inertial curl, the hyperlight-craft can slip through the warp opening before it closes - emitting the characteristic shock wave. Such a spoiler would be formed by using the electro-dynamic, high-energy-density electron waves which would normally proceed before the hyperlight craft, as a primary function of propulsion. When a similar function is executed by hypersonic aircraft, a sonic boom is formed as the inertial curl collapses on itself. In space, the light-velocity equivalent to this sonic boom would be in the form of Cherenkov radiation which is emitted as a mass crosses the light-velocity threshold sending tangential light to the direction of travel.



In 1913, the rotational version of the linear M-M experiment was successfully performed by G. Sagnac (see p. 65 - 67 of The Physical Foundations of General Relativity by D.W. Sciama, Heinemann Educational Books Ltd., 48 Charles St., London W1X8AH.) In 1925, Michelson and Gale used the spinning Earth as their rotational analog to the linear M-M experiment. It also showed successfully that the velocity of light sent in the direction of spin around the perimeter of a spinning disc (or of the surface of earth) varied from the velocity of the light sent against the spin. (refer diag. 3). 




The error of the M-M experiment is the test results are also valid for the case where there as an aether and it, too, as moving along with the same relative velocity and orbit as Earth maintains around the Sun. The tea cup analogy can be used to explain the error. If one stirs a cup of tea (preferably white) which has some small tea leaves floating on its surface, one notices some of these tea leaves orbiting the vortex in the centre of the cup. The leaves closer to the centre travel faster than those farther from the centre (both in linear and angular velocity).
Now, one must imagine himself greatly reduced in size and sitting upon one of these orbiting leaves. If one were to put his hands over the edge of his tea leaf on any side, would he feel any tea moving past?... No. The reason is that the motion of the tea is the force that has caused the velocity of the leaf. One could not detect any motion if both himself and the tea were travelling in the same direction and at the same velocity. However, if one had arms long enough to stick a hand in the tea closer to either the centre or the rim of the cup where the velocities were different to his own, then he would feel tea moving faster or slower than himself (respectively).
Also, if one were to spin his tea leaf at the same time as it orbits about the centre, placing his hands into the tea immediately surrounding his leaf would show inertial resistance against the spin moment of his leaf.


In the preceding analogy, the centre of the spinning tea (or vortex centre) represented the Sun, the leaf: the Earth; the tea: the aether; and the rider's hands: the light beams of the M-M test. In essence, what Michelson, Morley, Einstein, and many other scientists have said is that the M-M test showed the velocity of light was not affected by the Earth's orbital motion. "Therefore" they have said, "we have one of two conclusions to draw":
1) The Earth is orbiting the Sun and there is no aether, or,
2) The Earth is not orbiting the Sun and there is an aether but since the earth is not moving through the aether, the ether "wind" cannot be detected. Obviously, this conclusion is negated by Earth's observed heliocentric orbit.
However, their reasoning should also have incorporated a third option:
3) The Earth is orbiting the Sun and so is the aether; therefore, no aether wind could be detected in the orbital vector immediately in the vicinity of Earth.
In other words, the test results cannot prove or disprove the existence of an ether... only whether or not the Earth is moving relative to such an ether.



Remember, in 1913, G. Sagnac performed his version of the M-M experiment and corrected the inconclusive results which Michelson and Morley's test had obtained. In Sagnac's rotational analog of the M-M test the velocity of light was shown to vary. Also, in 1925 Michelson and Gale verified Sagnac's results with their own rotational analog. Even more recently, similar verification has been made using a ring-laser system to detect the rotational velocity of the Earth relative to the ether.



By the time the ether wind was proven to exist, Einstein's theories were already winning strong support on the merits of celestial observations which closely agreed with Einstein's predicted values. As a result, the scientific community decided to explain the ether wind phenomenon as a result of Earth's spinning in its own ether blanket which Earth was apparently dragging through space. No explanation was ever agreed upon as to the origin or extent of this ether blanket. It was simply a way to sweep a discrepancy under the carpet.



In a biography written just before his death, Professor Einstein is quoted as admitting he had a fundamental error in Relativity. It was, he said, one which-when corrected-will explain how light - an obvious wave form - can be propagated across an apparently non-inertial space. Einstein also stated that the discovery of the solution to this error would probably be the result of some serendipitous discovery in the sixties. However, before he died, Einstein did manage to partially correct his error. With the help of the well-known Dr. Erwin Schrödinger, Dr. Einstein was able to construct a 'total theory' for existence. It was called the "Unified Field Theory". Although Dr. Einstein was able to lay the basic framework before his death, it is reasonably certain that a more readily-usable version of the "Unified Field Theory" was only completed by other physicists after Einstein had died.
One of the more promising contributions toward a usable unified field theory was offered by Dr. Stanley Deser and Dr. Richard Arnowitt (see Appendix 4 of The Gravities Situation in Appendix (3) of this book)[soon to appear in New Illuminati]. They took the General Theory of Relativity which Einstein had devised and constructed a "bridge" or "creation tensor" to link the energy of nuclear fields with that of gravitational fields by co-variant matrices. The basic relationship of General Relativity which they used as a basis for their system is:
Ruv - .5guvR = 8(Pi)kTuv

= Ricci's ten-component sub-Riemannian space, curvature tensor

= the metric tensor

= the selected Ricci scalar components

= a universal constant: proportional to Newton's gravitational constant

= the usual constant: 3.14...

= the components (potentials) of the energy-stress tensor
Although Deser and Arnowitt's proposed equations were quite difficult to work with, it is assumed that subsequent linear variations - allowing major leaps in human science to develop.
When the Unified Field Theory is finally released to the public, it will be recognized quite easily; for it will have explained why the proton is exactly 1836 times the gravitational mass of an electron,... why there is no neutral mu-meson of mass 200,... why (h) is a constant... and why hc/e2 is always equal to (137)...
The true "Unified Field Theory" will no longer be called a "theory"; it will be known as the "Law of Unity". One inescapable conclusion will suddenly spring into the collective consciousness of those who grasp its meaning: "In the beginning was the WORD (a complex wave form) ... and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD. The same was in the beginning with GOD... " ( John 1:1).

This is a ‘not for profit’ site -
But if you like what we do please buy us a meal if you can
Donate any amount and receive at least one New Illuminati eBook!
Please click in the jar -

For further enlightening information enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com

And see

 New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati

New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed

The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com

The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)

We provide a live link to your original material on your site - which raises your ranking on search engines and helps spread your info further! This site is published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by copyright holder) – reproduction for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, if you give attribution to the work & author - and please include a (preferably active) link to the original (along with this or a similar notice).
Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web – but remember attribution! If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper!

From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com


  1. oh please dont use the patriarchal script of the Bible to prop up scientific THEORIES

  2. muzuzuzus said...
    oh please dont use the patriarchal script of the Bible to prop up scientific THEORIES
    ^^^^^^ Its all ONE it always has been and wiil be far after your feeble mind with no sense of perspective perishes...

  3. Aye - the babble is hardly a coherent or authoritative source - but Stan's only book publisher at the time of printing was a follower of christinanity. He's since dropped most of the superstitious trappings in his work.

  4. The value of all sorts of aberration depends only on (corresponds only to) the motion (direction and speed) of the earth. The existence of ether is evident.


Add your perspective to the conscious collective