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

    ________________________________________________________________________________________


     Home                    Book WGDE                    Glossary                    Extinction   

    Last modified 01/11/08


        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008

    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.

    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.  


Peeping Bill
sending the observers to the shrink