Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Death to Einstein! 2: Exposing the Fatal Flaws of Both Special and General Relativity
    Death to Einstein! 2: Exposing the Fatal Flaws of Both Special and General Relativity
    Death to Einstein! 2: Exposing the Fatal Flaws of Both Special and General Relativity
    Ebook105 pages1 hour

    Death to Einstein! 2: Exposing the Fatal Flaws of Both Special and General Relativity

    By Scott Reeves

    1/5

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    In the grand tradition of the previous volume of this devastating series, further arguments against the validity of special relativity are presented, this time by demolishing the experimental “evidence” of the long-lived muons. Also, an experimental method to disprove the relativity of simultaneity is presented.

    Unlike the previous volume, this one also brings death and mayhem to general relativity by dragging the famous twins out of the special theory and into the general where they belong, and slaying them there. It also tackles spacetime curvature, and receives a visit from Einstein himself, via a paper from 1918, in which the noted physicist attempts to rebut some of the arguments made in the present volume.

    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherScott Reeves
    Release dateMay 30, 2014
    ISBN9781310259845
    Death to Einstein! 2: Exposing the Fatal Flaws of Both Special and General Relativity

    Read more from Scott Reeves

    Related to Death to Einstein! 2

    Related ebooks

    Physics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      The Strangeness of Black Holes

      Apr 11, 2019

      This essay is one of the five winners in the 2019 writing competition held by the Black Hole Initiative at Harvard University. “The Black Hole Initiative offers a unique environment for thinking about the topic of black holes more creatively and comp

      6 min read

    • Article

      Q&A

      Nov 7, 2019

      What would happen if the Fermi Bubbles were close to Earth? The bubbles are manifested perpendicular to the plane of the Milky Way, so if we were closer to the bubbles, we would still not be inside the bubbles. But since we would be close to the bub

      2 min read

    • Article

      Could the Universe Be Finite?

      Dec 15, 2023

      On recent estimates, the observable universe—the portion of the universe that we can detect through our telescopes—extends about 47 billion light-years in every direction. But the limit of what we can see is one thing, and the limit of what exists is

      7 min read

    • Article

      Do Parallel Universes Exist?

      Nov 4, 2021

      Do Parallel Universes Exist?
      5 min read

    • Article

      The Strangeness of Black Holes

      Jan 17, 2019

      An Introduction to the Black Hole Institute Fittingly, the Black Hole Initiative (BHI) was founded 100 years after Karl Schwarzschild solved Einstein’s equations for general relativity—a solution that described a black hole decades before the first a

      7 min read

    • Article

      The Multiple Multiverses May Be One and the Same

      Jan 26, 2017

      The name of the image—the “Flammarion engraving”—may not ring a bell, but you’ve seen it many times. It depicts a traveler wearing a cloak and clutching a walking-stick; behind him is a varied landscape of towns and trees; surrounding all is a crysta

      11 min read

    • Article

      The Case for Fewer Dimensions: At small scales, gravity seems to blow up—but not if space becomes 1-D.

      Oct 8, 2015

      The adventures of the classic science-fiction novel Flatland by Edwin Abbott have sprung to life. The novel is narrated by a two-dimensional creature who calls himself “A Square,” who learns he has been embedded in a three-dimensional realm called Sp

      7 min read

    • Article

      Secrets Of Gravity

      Feb 22, 2024

      Secrets Of Gravity
      9 min read

    • Article

      At The Edge Of Everything

      Jul 6, 2022

      At The Edge Of Everything
      3 min read

    • Article

      Infinite Garbage Can: Can information ever be rescued from inside a black hole?

      Nov 21, 2013

      String theorist Vijay Balasubramanian grapples with the garbage cans of the universe: black holes. His research on particle physics at the University of Pennsylvania and The City University of New York Graduate Center questions the apparent loss of i

      4 min read

    • Article

      Doomed Universe

      Jul 12, 2021

      Doomed Universe
      3 min read

    • Article

      Life Is a Braid in Spacetime: How to See Yourself in a World Where Only Math Is Real.: How to see yourself in a world where only math is real.

      Jan 9, 2014

      “Excuse me, but what’s the time?” I’m guessing that you, like me, are guilty of having asked this question, as if it were obvious that there is such a thing as the time. Yet you’ve probably never approached a stranger and asked “Excuse me, but what’s

      7 min read

    • Article

      How They Form

      Mar 17, 2022

      How They Form
      3 min read

    • Article

      How Much More Can We Learn About the Universe?: These are the few limits on our ability to know.

      Sep 1, 2016

      As a cosmologist, some of the questions I hear most frequently after a lecture include: What lies beyond our universe? What is our universe expanding into? Will our universe expand forever? These are natural questions to ask. But there is an even dee

      7 min read

    • Article

      How Much More Can We Learn About the Universe?

      Aug 31, 2017

      As a cosmologist, some of the questions I hear most frequently after a lecture include: What lies beyond our universe? What is our universe expanding into? Will our universe expand forever? These are natural questions to ask. But there is an even dee

      7 min read

    • Article

      A Letter to Einstein From the Future: Two Princeton Physicists Catch Albert Up.

      Sep 14, 2017

      We don’t believe in time travel, and we’re not into mysticism. But what if we could write a letter to Albert Einstein to tell him about gravity and black holes in a few paragraphs? We’d write something like this letter. Steven Gubser and Frans Pretor

      4 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Death to Einstein! 2

    1/5

    1 rating1 review

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 1/5
      Can't even get the frames of reference correct. Assumptions are made that are not logical. Immediately starts with a disclaimer that his thoughts may be incoherent and we should just take his word that the ideas are valid in his context. I've personally had to incorporate algorithms to keep digital clocks on GPS satellites synchronized by accounting for time dilation. The author is clearly misinformed or this whole series is a facade to elicit entertaining ideas.

    Book preview

    Death to Einstein! 2 - Scott Reeves

    Death to Einstein! 2

    Copyright © 2014 by Scott Reeves

    All rights reserved.

    Smashwords Edition, License Notes

    This ebook is licensed for your personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be re-sold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this book with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each person you share it with. If you're reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then you should return to Smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.

    Books by Scott Reeves:

    The Big City

    Demonspawn

    Billy Barnaby’s Twisted Christmas

    The Dream of an Ancient God

    The Last Legend

    Inferno: Go to Hell

    Zombie Galaxy: Outbreak

    Scruffy Unleashed: A Novella

    Colony

    A Hijacked Life

    The Dawkins Delusion

    The Newer New Revelations

    Death to Einstein!

    The House at the Center of the Worlds

    The Miracle Brigade

    Tales of Science Fiction

    Tales of Fantasy

    The Chronicles of Varuk: Book One

    Soldiers of Infinity: a Novelette

    Snowybrook Inn: Book One

    Snowybrook Inn: Book Two

    Snowybrook Inn: Book Three

    Welcome to Snowybrook Inn

    Liberal vs. Conservative: A Novella

    Temporogravitism and Other Speculations of a Crackpot

    A Crackpot’s Notebook, Volume 1

    Graphic Novels:

    The Adventures of Captain Bob in Outer Space

    FREE Star Trek short stories by Scott Reeves on Wattpad:

    Star Trek Voyager: Phantoms of the Mind

    Star Trek TOS: Warp Speed

    Star Trek TNG: Final Requiem

    Star Trek Voyager: Home

    Star Trek TNG: The Haunting of Orgala 512

    Star Trek TNG: Leap of Faith

    Star Trek Voyager: Intrepid Voyagers

    http://www.youtube.com/TheBigScaboo

    Twitter: @scottareeves

    Part One

    Death to Special Relativity!

    NOTE: I have made numerous videos that I believe enhance, clarify, and/or extend the ideas in this book. They are posted on my YouTube channel, and I give links to relevant videos at the end of each chapter.

    Death to the Long-Lived Muons!

    I’m writing a series of essays on cosmic-ray muons, in addition to the video I already did (it’s currently on YouTube). Why am I doing this? Can’t I explain my ideas in a single essay? No, I can’t. I wrote one, then started second guessing myself and thought of more stuff I might need to address, so I started a second, trying to tackle the subject from a slightly different angle. Then I started second guessing that one, and started a third…

    At this point I’m not even sure which one I wrote first, since I keep coming back to each to add and modify, even while working on the others. So if they seem out of sequence, blame it on that. I’m really good at overwriting, and on leaving in details that I think might be or know to be erroneous or superfluous, simply because I don’t want to delete a train of thought that I might snag onto at a later date.

    Anyway, some single essay may be incomplete or fail on a key point, but hopefully I’ve written enough to address the fails or unclear points, so that taken together they all get my idea across. Besides, I doubt I’m the first person to see this fatal flaw in the contention that muons are experimental verification of relativity (in fact I know I’m not), so if I don’t get my ideas across, surely someone else has or will.

    ******

    One of the oft-touted experimental verifications of length contraction and time dilation is the case of the long-lived muons. Muons decay rapidly and thus normally live extremely brief lives. However, muons generated by cosmic rays high in the atmosphere and traveling at relativistic speed are able to survive long enough to reach the ground, which their normal counterparts (i.e. muons at rest in the observer’s frame) would not be able to do. The speeding muons thus outlive their normal counterparts.

    In other words, let’s say we have a laboratory on the ground which contains 20 muons, and an observer within the laboratory. We also have 20 muons that have just been generated by cosmic rays near the top of an extremely tall mountain, and these muons speed toward the ground. By the time these muons hit the ground, all 20 muons in the laboratory will long since have decayed. The reason the traveling muons haven’t decayed, and have managed to hit the ground, is that for them, time is dilated and is passing at a slower rate, thus they decay more slowly compared to the normal laboratory muons.

    But — time dilation is reciprocal, right? From the viewpoint of the traveling muons, they are actually standing still, while the ground and the laboratory muons speed toward them at relativistic speed. The laboratory muons are thus experiencing time dilation, and thus should outlive the normal muons, which are now the traveling muons.

    I smell a Twins-type paradox here. Which set of muons actually outlives the other? Seems to me that according to reciprocal time dilation, they should both outlive the other, which is physically impossible.

    However, according to relativity’s supporters, everything is fine and dandy. I quote from Relativity and Its Roots by Banesh Hoffmann:

    Let us now look at the situation from the point of view of an observer moving so as to keep pace with the muons. Since the muons are stationary relative to him, he will not observe a relativistic slowing of their decay rates. But he — and the muons — will see the mountain rushing toward them with almost the speed of light, and therefore relative to them the mountain will be much shorter than it was for the observer on the ground. And since, relative to the muons, the factor by which the height of the mountain contracts is the same as that by which, relative to the ground, the time was slowed, the number of muons reaching the level of the base of the mountain will come out the same in either frame of reference.

    That’s all well and good. But who would ever assert that in one frame, only, say, 5 muons will reach the ground, while from another frame, 10 muons will reach the ground? Who exactly is questioning that there will be a discrepancy in the number of muons that reach the ground? This is not a photon analysis problem, where we’re trying to account for all the photons in the Twins Paradox.

    The issue is time dilation, not the number of muons reaching the ground. The issue is which set of muons actually outlives the other, not the number of muons reaching the ground.

    My whole point is, this whole muon business is supposedly a demonstration of time dilation and length contraction. The whole premise is that the cosmic-ray muons outlive their normal counterparts because they’re moving at nearly the speed of light. So why does the relativist say, Oh, the mountain is shorter from the traveling muon frame by the same degree that time is dilated from the mountain’s frame, therefore the number of muons reaching the base of the mountain is the same in both frames. Problem resolved.

    Huh? What the hell does that have to do with anything?

    It’s a non-sequitur. Keep your eye on the ball, people.

    There’s a Twins Paradox here that can’t be resolved by claiming that acceleration breaks the reciprocity, as in the actual Twins Paradox.

    The mountain is completely irrelevant to the whole discussion. We could just as easily postulate a stationary mountain next to the traveling muons, and say the traveling muons are stationary at its base. Each frame will then have a tall mountain stationary next to it, with each mountain in one frame

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1