Difference between revisions of "A Brief Reexamination of Relativity"

From Natural Philosophy Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Imported from text file)
 
(Imported from text file)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
==Abstract==
 
==Abstract==
  
The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]
+
The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation.
 +
 
 +
[[Category:Scientific Paper|brief reexamination relativity]]
  
 
[[Category:Relativity]]
 
[[Category:Relativity]]

Revision as of 09:53, 1 January 2017

Scientific Paper
Title A Brief Reexamination of Relativity
Author(s) Shao-Zhi Xu
Keywords Relativity
Published 1997
Journal None

Abstract

The paper confirms that the Einstein-Lorentz Group is a null-set 1 and will offer mathematical and physical facts to show that: (a) The so called 4-D interval invariance is irrelevant to the second postulate of relativity; (b) It is worthless when the Lorentz transformation meets the 4-D invariance; (c) The Lorentz transformation contradicts itself and is unqualified as a coordinate transformation; (d) The deSitter argument has an intrinsic gap and cannot serve as evidence that the velocity of light is independent of the speed of the source; (e) The second principle of relativity has no empirical evidence. It is a glaring error to ascribe the electrodynamics of moving bodies to any observer's observation.