SR
contradicts
GR

    Some relativists opine that a stationary observer will measure decreases in length and distances. However, this ambiguous
    claim is deliberately left to the interpretation of each juror. Measurement is a subjective activity. If my clock is bad or I lied or I
    measured wrong, will the Moon actually shrink in size because of my misleading testimony? One thing is for the Moon to
    actually shrink in size. Another is for me to measure the diameter of the Moon and conclude that the Moon is now smaller.
    If the physical interpretation that a relativist gives the term ‘length contraction’ is that an observer merely ‘measures’ or
    ‘perceives’ that the traveler is flatter, this doesn’t concern Physics. In the best of cases, it concerns psychologists, and in
    severe cases, psychiatrists.

    Indeed, we do not need equations, measurement, or motion to realize that distances and the sizes of objects change as a
    function of perspective. All we need is to indulge in a few beers or to stand at unique locations! Do the following experiment
    at home (but only under the guidance of a trained special relativist). Place a box on a table, walk around, and peer from
    different angles. You should come to the realization that a particular side of the box shrinks and grows depending on your
    location with respect to it (Fig. 1).
Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist

    Fig. 1   Cosmetic contraction
If length contraction is merely a visual effect,
we don’t need to travel anywhere near the
speed of light to experience compression.
All we need to do is drink a few beers or
look at an object from different angles. The
figure at the top of the page illustrates this
first example. The picture on the right
depicts the second scenario. The observer
sees and measures different lengths from
different locations. What have relativists
proved?Measurement is subjective. It is an
issue of perceptions. After a mathematician
measures, you must rely on his testimony. Physics works a little differently. In Physics, the
box contracted (or not)irrespective of measurement or perceptions. The mathematicians still
rely on medieval '
tree-in-the-forest' reasoning to peddle their theories.






Peeping Bill
sending the observers to the shrink

    So what have relativists proved? If length contraction is merely an optical illusion with no real physical consequences,
    relativists have wasted 100 years developing formulas and arguing in circles. Relativity places the observer at the center
    of inquiry and relies on his testimony. This reduces all claims of relativity to opinions. Mirages, perceptions, appearances,
    measurements, and opinions have no relevance in Physics. Testimony is inadmissible in the Court of Science.

    However, my argument satisfies no one. It is likely to upset relativists because it trivializes the 100 years of efforts they put
    into developing their ‘stunning’ theory. It upsets me because it lets the idiots of Mathematical Physics off the hook too easily.
    So I will go further and argue now that SR’s claim contradicts sacred principles of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.
    Until the mathematical physicists resolve these qualitative discrepancies, they cannot claim that Special Relativity is scientific,
    let alone claim that the theory has been confirmed by experiment.  

    ________________________________________________________________________________________


                                  Home                    Books                    Glossary            




        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008