Vovó da Pá Virada

Imagem derivada do Youtube



Eles nos prometeram carros voadores...
Mas onde estão eles?

Acompanhe a saga de uma família comum que busca uma resposta para os descaminhos da ciência.
O que eles descobriram vai estremecer as bases da ciência:

O Erro de Einstein
(annus mirabilis)

Demorei a encontrar um documentário sobre Física Alternativa. O filmete foi produzido pelos membros da NPA - Natural Phylosophy Alliance - ou Liga dos Velhinhos Transviados.



Enquanto a mídia sonolenta não produz nada melhor, divirtam-se com este mini-documentário. Quem puder, traduza-o e envie-o para o YOUTUBE.

Pelo que me lembro já foram apontados alguns erros de Einstein, foi um cientista Indiano na década de 60.
Mas não consegui descobrir oq era.

Cheguei a conclusão que Einstein errou, mas errou é de propósito.

Ele tinha uma intuiçao de que nada poderia ser mais rápido que a luz.
E procurava criar uma formula que serviço de argumento pra essa conclusão dele.

E ele encontrou uma formula, mas não o satisfez, porque ela dava condições de algo existir acima da velocidade da luz.

Então ele se utilizou de um artifício matemático, coisas que podemos fazer como que brincadeiras em formulas, modificando-as sem modificar o essencial dela.

E incluiu um elemento na fórmula, que não alterava o resultado, mas para velocidades abaixo da velocidade da luz.
E geraria números complexos, se fossem acima dela.
E teoricamente um número "infinito" ao estar exatamente na velocidade da luz.

Eu não aceito o conceito de infinito, não no mundo real.
Tudo tem limite, podemos não saber onde é, nem nunca saber, mas isto não torna algo sem limite.

Então descobri a malandragem dele ..

Xevious escreveu:Pelo que me lembro já foram apontados alguns erros de Einstein, foi um cientista Indiano na década de 60.
Mas não consegui descobrir oq era.

Cheguei a conclusão que Einstein errou, mas errou é de propósito.

Ele tinha uma intuiçao de que nada poderia ser mais rápido que a luz.
E procurava criar uma formula que serviço de argumento pra essa conclusão dele.

E ele encontrou uma formula, mas não o satisfez, porque ela dava condições de algo existir acima da velocidade da luz.

Então ele se utilizou de um artifício matemático, coisas que podemos fazer como que brincadeiras em formulas, modificando-as sem modificar o essencial dela.

E incluiu um elemento na fórmula, que não alterava o resultado, mas para velocidades abaixo da velocidade da luz.
E geraria números complexos, se fossem acima dela.
E teoricamente um número "infinito" ao estar exatamente na velocidade da luz.

Eu não aceito o conceito de infinito, não no mundo real.
Tudo tem limite, podemos não saber onde é, nem nunca saber, mas isto não torna algo sem limite.

Então descobri a malandragem dele ..

Abaixo, uma lista de problemas com a relatividade à espera de confirmações...

Counterexamples to Relativity

The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[note 1] The falsehood of Relativity is also useful to liberals in pulling impressionable students away from the truth of the Bible. Here is a list of 48 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect.
Computer simulations based on the theory of relativity predict far more black holes than are observed.[1] Indeed, it is debatable whether black holes exist at all.
The orbital eccentricity of the Moon's orbit is increasing, contrary to what Relativity predicts.[2]
The Pioneer anomaly.
The Sun is a perfect sphere - "the solar flattening is ... too small to agree with that predicted from its surface rotation."[3]
Quantum entanglement near the event horizon of a black hole -- with one particle of the pair on one side, and other particle of the pair on the other side -- defies the Theory of Relativity.[4]
Subatomic particles with mass have a speed observed to be as fast as the speed of light ("we are 100% sure that the speed of light is the speed of neutrinos"[5]), which contradicts Relativity because the Lorentz factor is then infinite.[6][7] Neutrinos were observed to travel at the speed of light by an independent experiment also: "Their neutrinos traveled at precisely the speed of light, not faster or slower."[8]
Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth ("flybys"). During the gravity assists from Earth, both the Galileo spacecraft and the Near Earth Asteroid Rendezvous (NEAR) spacecraft experienced a change in velocity different than that predicted by General Relativity.[9][10]
Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen, nonexistent "dark matter" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.[11] "Dark matter mysteriously missing around sun. Theories say neighborhood should be filled with it, but new study shows otherwise."[12]
The acceleration in the expansion of the universe confounds Relativity, and unseen "dark energy" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.
Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by Relativity, well beyond the margin of error.[note 2]
Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravitational waves predicted by the theory, no direct observation of gravity waves has occurred.[13] Sound like global warming?
The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light.
The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass?
The observed lack of curvature in overall space.[note 3]
The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominated and contradicted Relativity.
The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement.[note 4]
The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54, Matthew 15:28, and Matthew 27:51.
The failure to discover gravitons, despite spending hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching. While these tax dollars were not necessarily "wasted", the lack of results indicate that scientists need to revisit their hypothesis.
Newly observed data reveal that the fine-structure constant, a (alpha), actually varies throughout the universe, demonstrating that all inertial frames of reference do not experience identical laws of physics as claimed by Relativity.[note 5]
The double star "W13" weighs "40 times as much as the sun—more than enough to form a black hole. So why is it not a black hole? The only explanation [a leading scientist] can think of ... does not make astrophysical sense."[14]
The inability of the theory to lead to other insights, contrary to every verified theory of physics.
The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions.[15]
The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe.[16]
"According to Einstein’s view on the universe, space-time should be smooth and continuous" but observations instead show "inexplicable static" greater than "all artificial sources of" possible background noise.[17]
"The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two [QM and Relativity] conceptions of time don’t gel."[18]
The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violate causality and permit absurd time travel.[19]
The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered (and thus low entropy) black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[note 6]
Data from the PSR B1913+16 increasingly diverge from predictions of the General Theory of Relativity such that, despite a Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded for early work on this pulsar, no data at all have been released about it for over five years.
The lack of useful devices developed based on any insights provided by the theory; no lives have been saved or helped, and the theory has not led to other useful theories and may have interfered with scientific progress.[note 7] This stands in stark contrast with every verified theory of science.
Relativity requires different values for the inertia of a moving object: in its direction of motion, and perpendicular to that direction. This contradicts the logical principle that the laws of physics are the same in all directions.
Relativity requires that anything traveling at the speed of light must have mass zero, so it must have momentum zero. But the laws of electrodynamics require that light have nonzero momentum.
Unlike most well-tested fundamental physical theories, the theory of relativity violates conditions of a conservative field. Path independence, for example, is lacking under the theory of relativity, as in the "twin paradox" whereby the age of each twin under the theory is dependent on the path he traveled.[note 8]
The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (2pR) is length-contracted. However, since R is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to an apparent paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal R, or is it less than R?
Based on Relativity, Einstein predicted in 1905 that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory; they also make the implausible claim that relativistic effects from gravitation precisely offset the effects from differences in velocity.[20]
The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his "clock" (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because both twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative. Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.[note 9]
Based on Relativity, Einstein claimed in 1909 that the aether does not exist, but in order to make subatomic physics work right, theorists had to introduce the aether-like concept of the Higgs field, which fills all of space and breaks symmetries.
Minkowski space is predicated on the idea of four-dimensional vectors of which one component is time. However, one of the properties of a vector space is that every vector have an inverse. Time (formally: movement forward in time) cannot be a vector because it has no inverse.
In Genesis 1:6-8, we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous aether.
It is impossible to perform an experiment to determine whether Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, or the older Lorentz aether theory is correct. Believing one over the other is a matter of faith.
Despite a century of wasting billions of dollars in work on the theory, "No one knows how to solve completely the equations of general relativity that describe gravity; they are simply beyond current understanding."[21]
Experiments in electromagnetic induction contradict Relativity: "Einstein’s Relativity ... can not explain the experiment in graph 2, in which moving magnetic field has not produced electric field."[22][23]
Relativity breaks down if a solenoid is traveling at or near the speed of light.[24]
General Relativity predicts how the gravitational fields of the Sun and Moon generate ocean tides. However, in the summer of 2009, tides along the East Coast of the United States were higher than expected. [25]
The supermassive black hole within the Andromeda galaxy puzzled researchers by increasing in brightness by a factor of 100 in 2006.[26]
Scientists are unable to explain a June 2012 cluster of earthquakes in Ireland.[27]
Apparently, the equations of General Relativity do not apply to the motions of extra-solar planets. Scientists are studying Gamma Cephei, a system of two stars and one known planet. When data from the Hubble Space telescope was analyzed, it was found that the observed orbital arrangement should not be stable.[28]
General Relativity fails to predict the Allais Effect. The Christian researcher and economist Maurice Allais noted a sudden change in the orientation of a swinging pendulum during the 1959 solar eclipse.[29] Many subsequent attempts to duplicate the result have been reported as failures, consistent with an concerted effort to suppress knowledge about the phenomenon.
The Pauli Exclusion Principle states that no two electrons in a closed system can exist in the same quantum state and if one electron changes all others must compensate. As the universe is a closed system when one electron changes state so must all others, even if they are thousands of light years apart.[30]
(add to list)
For a discussion of attempts to rebut some of these counterarguments, see Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity.
See also

Theory of relativity
General Theory of Relativity
Special Theory of Relativity
E=mc²
Counterexamples to Evolution
Counterexamples to an Old Earth
Counterexamples to the Bible
Notes

? See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by Barack Obama.
? In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity's fundamental formula, G_{\mu\nu} = 8 \pi K T_{\mu\nu}\,, was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of Relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming Relativity.
? If space were curved, one would never expect the universe as a whole to be almost precisely flat. Yet it is.
? Quantum entanglement has not yet communicated information faster than the speed of light, but has already exhibited action faster than the speed of light.
? For a report on the data, see a paper submitted in 2010 by John Webb and Julian King of the University of new South Wales, Australia, to the Physical Review Letters.
? Contrived explanations have been suggested for this dilemma, such as Stephen Hawking proposing that the entropy of matter in a black hole is somehow stored in the surface area of its event horizon to be released back into its surroundings as the black hole decays by radiation, known as "Hawking radiation."
? Contrary to the claims of Relativists, the GPS system has never been based on Relativity. The Time Service Department, U.S. Navy, observed that "The Operational Control System (OCS) of the Global Positioning System (GPS) does not include the rigorous transformations between coordinate systems that Einstein’s general theory of relativity would seem to require" in part because "the effects of relativity, where they are different from the effects predicted by classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, are too small to matter – less than one centimeter, for users on or near the earth.”
? In defense of the theory, it is noted that it mandates conservation of the matter-stress-energy tensor (the only way to get real conservation, since matter and energy are interchangeable.) This follows from the "contracted Bianchi identity." [1] Also, the curl of the "gravitational field vector" is exactly zero in the absence of moving sources, due to symmetries of Riemann's tensor. It follows, from Stokes' Theorem, that the gravitational field is conservative and has a potential function. Energy is conserved.
? Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be de minimis.
References

? "The ratio of the mass of black holes in galaxy centers to the rest of the matter in galaxies is larger in the simulations than in the real universe." Scientific American November 28, 2012
? http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.0212
? http://www.tgdaily.com/space-features/65491-why-is-the-sun-so-round
? https://simonsfoundation.org/features/science-news/mathematics-and-physical-science/alice-and-bob-meet-the-wall-of-fire/
? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17364682
? http://www.hindustantimes.com/Roll-over-Einstein-Law-of-physics-challenged/Article1-749189.aspx - note that a similar observation of faster-than-light speeds was also made in 2007 (with a larger margin of error).
? http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/18/us-science-neutrinos-light-idUSTRE7AH0T720111118
? http://junkscience.com/2012/03/21/no-you-still-cant-go-faster-than-light/
? http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/19088/1/98-0296.pdf
? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/
? http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1873
? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47101905
? http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.3781
? http://www.economist.com/node/17035953
? Mystery:Why Is the Kilogram Losing Weight?
? http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092-speed-of-light-may-have-changed-recently.html ("A varying speed of light contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity, and would undermine much of traditional physics. But some physicists believe it would elegantly explain puzzling cosmological phenomena such as the nearly uniform temperature of the universe.")
? Hunt for gravitational waves discovers unexpected data instead.
? http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space
? http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i13/p1446_1 . The popular science press promotes black holes to a far greater extent than wormholes.
? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5255/abs/227270a0.html
? Statement in awarding the coveted Fields Medal
? http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/qingping1.pdf
? http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0504223
? http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3244279
? http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/07/hightides/
? http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2010/0525/Two-giant-black-holes-surprise-scientists-with-unexpected-behavior.
? http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0607/1224317443871.html
? http://stardate.org/radio/program/gamma-cephei-iv
? http://www.allais.info/allaisdox.htm
? http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/life-and-physics/2012/feb/28/1.
.