Proof that interpretation of time dilation is wrong in special theory

of relativity and mass energy equivalence(E=mc 2) based on special

theory of relativity is also wrong or proof that some/whole part of
special theory of relativity is wrong
First we will discuss derivation of special theory of relativity in order to understand the faults in the
derivation of special theory of relativity.

Derivation of special theory of relativity and faults/errors in derivation of special theory of

relativity:

Assumption/fundamental postulate of special relativity: ‘Speed of light is same in all reference

frames regardless of the speed of observer and the speed of source of light.’

[Note:
This fundamental assumption/postulate stated just above is actually a wrong assumpti on. It can be
proven that ‘speed of light can be different in different reference frames depending on the speed of
observer and the speed of source of light’ using Maxwell’s equation and some mathematical
analysis. Such a mathematical analysis is given below for your reference.

We will try to derive equation of speed of light emitted by source moving with respect to a particular
reference frame r2. Suppose a co-ordinate system is fixed in reference frame r 1 of source in such a
way that the source of electromagnetic radiation is at origin of the co-ordinate system and also the
source and the reference frame r1 in which the source resides are moving with respect to another
reference frame r2 and this motion of reference frame r 1 with respect to reference frame r2 is in
positive x-direction with speed v or in other words source is moving with speed v with respect to
reference frame r2 in positive x-direction. Suppose wave propagates in positive x-direction, E-field
oscillations are in y-direction and H-field oscillations are in z-direction and also E-field variations are
sinusoidal with respect to co-ordinate system fixed in reference frame r 1.

Therefore for co-ordinate system fixed in reference frame r1:

Assume , and | | (1)

Using Maxwell’s equation, we will find B.

(2)

Finding from assumed values of Ex, Ey, and Ez , we get

→ → →

| | (3)
Therefore from Maxwell’s equation

(4)

Integrating and finding B,

B (0, 0, ) (5)

The phase velocity is the velocity of point on wave that moves with wave at constant phase. In other
words, phase velocity is the velocity with which sine wave peaks are propagated. In our case phas e
velocity is the speed of propagation of electromagnetic wave. To obtain equation of propagation
speed of wave/phase velocity, the phase of the point on wave should be regarded as a constant.

With respect to reference frame r1:

(1.a)

Differentiating it, we get

Propagation speed with respect to reference frame r1 (1.b)

But for reference frame r2 the distance in x direction increases by the amount because of
motion of reference frame r1 with respect to reference frame r2 in positive x-direction with speed v.
Therefore denoting the x-co-ordinate of the co-ordinate system fixed in r2 as and assuming
when , we get

(1.c)

Therefore to get the velocity of wave with respect to reference frame r2: From equation (1.a) and
(1.c), we get

Differentiating it to get phase velocity with respect to reference frame r 2, we get

(6)

Now, we have

(7)

For reference frame r1: (Using the co-ordinate system fixed in r1 as described before)
From equations (5) & (7)

(8)

Finding from equation (8), we get

→ → →

| | (9)

From equations (2) & (7)

| | | | | || (10)
|

From and equation (7)

| | | | | || (11)
|

Multiplying equation (10) and (11), we get,

| || |
| || |
(12)

From equations (4) and (7)

| | (13)

Using equations (1), (3), (9), and (13) for putting values into equation (12), we get

(14)

(15)
√

From equation (1.b) and (15),

(16)
√

But speed of light with respect to reference frame r2, using equation (6) and (16):
 (17)
√

Hence above mentioned particular example shows that the simple Galilean velocity addition works
with electromagnetic waves and light also. Note that we had taken only a simple case above bu t
generalization of equation (17) can be done and that generalization can be proved also by doing
appropriate similar analysis. In general it can be proved that in vector form for electromagnetic
waves

→ → →

Above mentioned example and analysis simply proves that velocity addition is wrong in special
theory of relativity. And very large velocities such as the velocity of light can also be added by simple
conventional vector algebra considering Galilean addition of velocities. It also proves that velocity of
light can be different in different reference frames moving with different velocities. Hence the
fundamental postulate of special theory of relativity that ‘speed of light is same in all reference
frames regardless of their velocities’ is proved wrong. Also, the maximum speed limit may not exist.
Hence the sentence ‘Nothing can exceed speed of light’ can also be wrong. ]

Apart from this wrong assumption/postulate assumed in special theory of relativity, there is another
error in derivation of special theory of relativity which we shall discuss below.

Einstein did a thought experiment which is given below.

Einstein’s thought experiment:

Suppose a light ray travels up and down in a reference frame r 1 as shown in figure just above and
reference frame r1 is travelling with respect to reference frame r 2 with speed v in horizontal
direction. In reference frame r1 the light ray originates from point A, reaches point M where it gets
reflected back due to mirror kept there and again terminates at A.

For reference frame r1, suppose total time flow during the ray’s travel from A to M is . Therefore
according to the assumption/postulate (which is actually a wrong assumption) assumed by Einstein
that speed of light is same in all reference frames and it equals c,
 (18)

Suppose for reference frame r2, total time flow during the ray’s travel from A to M is In
reference frame r2, the path of the light ray will have a vertical as well as horizontal component as
shown in figure just below due to horizontal motion of reference frame r 1 with respect to reference
frame r2 . In other words, the light ray will travel some horizontal distance due to horizontal
speed v of reference frame r1 with respect to reference frame r2 and vertical distance h in reference
frame r2 which is shown in figure given just below.

Here also according to the wrong assumption assumed by Einstein, the speed of light should be c.

In time the light ray travels AM distance.

√
(19)

From (18) and (19)

( )

( )

(20)
√

Equation (20) is the equation of time dilation derived by Einstein. Limits/Drawbacks/Faults of this
equation derived by Einstein and the derivation are discussed below.
Limits/Drawbacks/Errors/Faults of the derivation done by Einstein:

 The fundamental postulate that ‘speed of light is same in all reference frames’ is wrong
 Apart from the error of assuming the wrong assumption, the derivation of special theory of
relativity performed by Einstein is only one simple case of the general derivation that can be
performed. The method of derivation performed by Einstein is only applicable to the
situation where the direction in which light travels with respect to the reference frame of
source of light (reference frame r 1) is perpendicular to the direction in which reference
frame of source (reference frame r 1) travels with respect to another reference frame
(reference frame r2). In other words, method of derivation done by Einstein is only
applicable to the situation in which light travels only up-down (vertical) in reference frame r1
when reference frame r1 is travelling in horizontal direction with respect to reference frame
r2. In reality light does not always travel only in vertical direction for which Einstein did
derivation. In reality, light can travel in any direction including the only direction for which
Einstein did derivation. Method of derivation done by Einstein is not applicable to all
directions but it is applicable to only the case in which light travels in perpendicular
direction. The general derivation is possible by specifying the direction with an angle . By
denoting the direction using a variable , we can obtain general result in terms of . And by
putting specific value of in that general solution, for which Einstein did derivation,
we can obtain equation derived by him. Such a general derivation using the wrong
assumption assumed by Einstein is given below in which light is assumed to travel at an
angle with the horizontal in reference frame r 1 (with respect to reference frame r1 ) and
reference frame r1 is assumed to travel in horizontal direction with respect to reference
frame r2.
Now, we will do another thought experiment (more general than the same done by Einstein)
assuming that ‘light travels at constant speed c in all reference frames’ (which is actually a wrong
assumption but we are using it here to explain further faults/logical errors in derivation of special
theory of relativity apart from the mistake of assuming the wrong assumption. It means that even if
you accept the assumption assumed by Einstein to be true (which is actually false and should not be
accepted by you as true assumption), there are further logical errors in derivation of special theory
of relativity that will force you to reject the theory). Suppose reference frame r 1 travels at speed v
with respect to reference frame r2 as shown in figure below, and a light ray travels from point C to A
where a mirror reflects it and sends it to D. Thus light ray travels from C to A to D at an angle  with
respect to horizontal in reference frame r 1.Suppose time flow during the ray reaches from C to D in
reference frame r1 is Δt1 and the time flow during the ray reaches from C to D in reference frame r 2 is
Δt2.
 Now, (21)

(22)

Now, for reference frame r1:

(23)

Now, for reference frame r2:

For reference frame r2, horizontal distance y and light path x increases due to the motion of
reference frame r1 with respect to reference frame r2. From Δ ABC (or Δ ABD) in figure just above,
the increase in the horizontal distance can be found by considering the time interval equal to the
time taken for ray to reach from C to A (or A to D) which is equal to for reference frame r2 .
Therefore increase in the horizontal distance

(24)

And we have (25)

Applying Pythagorean relation for reference frame r2, we get

(26)

From equations (21),(24) ,(25)and (26), we get

( ) ( )

( ) ( )

cot
 cot

Now,1+cot2θ=cosec2θ

cosec

( )

From equation(23) putting

( ) ( )

( ) ( ) (27)

The above equation can be considered a quadratic equation of variable ( ). Solving for it, using
√
equation

s in
√ (A)

This equation shows that for different values of θ and v, there can be different values of the ratio
( ). For any specific reference frame, we know that there can be constant v. But, there can exist
many values of θ possibly infinite because light can travel in any direction in any reference frame.
There can be at least one value of θ for each direction in which light travels.

If you put rad in equation (A), you will get the equation of time dilation derived by Einstein.

The equation (A) shows that interpretation of time dilation (which was obtained by considering
only rad) in Einstein’s special theory of relativity was wrong. In wrong interpretation of time

dilation in special theory of relativity, it was derived that √ which was the case

obtained for rad only and it disregarded the other infinite possible values of that can exist. It
means that Lorentz transformations are also wrong and wrongly derived.

Based on the wrong interpretation of time dilation done previously in relativity and wrongly
derived/assumed Lorentz transformations, it was wrongly assumed that,
 √
From which mass-energy equivalence i.e. E=mc2 equation was derived which should also be wrong
because of the wrong base from which it was derived. The formal proof that E=mc 2 is wrong is given
below.
Therefore interpretation of time dilation and energy mass equivalence was wrong in special theory
of relativity.
If we continue analysis which was done previously by Einstein in special theory of relativity, we
should get

(28)
√ sin

which again depends on θ and does not make sense.

From above mentioned equation (28), if θ radians (which can always happen in infinite number
of ways)
(29)
√

Squaring both sides and rearranging we get,

(30)
Here and c are assumed constants.Doing differentiation, we get

(B)

Now, if we consider work done and energy as same quantity (however they can be treated
differently:energy can be associated with any change and work done can be associated with desired
change.Here we will consider them same quantity)

Work done as per conventional definition=force distance. Treating work done and energy as same
quantity

energy ∫ and

(C)

Putting in equation (C) to convert formula in to formula in , we get

(D)

From equation (B) and (D)

 (E)

Integrating both sides

Suppose , then differentiating it , we get which is completely

opposite to equation (E). Therefore . Similarly suppose then
differentiating it, we get which is also completely opposite to equation (E). Hence
. Therefore the concept of energy mass equivalence can/may be wrong. There may be
another way of similar proof using equation(28) instead of equation (29) which may include terms in
θ and sign instead of sign in those equations which may show that ene rgy and mass are
different quantities. Therefore energy and mass should be treated as different quantities and they
are not equivalent. Mass resists change while energy induces change when it is not binding energy.
The interpretation of time dilation based on special theory of relativity was wrong, although time
dilation may or may not exist and it may depend on some other factors such as the amount of
mass(inertial charge), energy(excitation charge) etc.

Conclusions: It just reveals that the way in which special theory of relativity was derived is simply
wrong. First of all the fundamental assumption in special theory of relativity that speed of light is
same in all reference frames regardless of speed of observer and speed of source is completely
wrong. But I have assumed the wrong assumption in this proof just to show that there are serious
logical errors like assuming rad only in further derivation of special theory of relativity apart
from error of assuming the wrong assumption. Hence the double mistakes committed by Einstein in
deriving special theory of relativity are revealed here. First he assumed the wrong assumption that
speed of light is same in all reference frames and second, even after assuming the wrong
assumption, he committed logical error of assuming radians only in further derivation from
the wrong assumption. Here note that this proof should be used only for describing the mistakes
committed by Einstein in deriving special theory of relativity and to show that special theory of
relativity is wrong. It should not be used for other purposes. One example of such a purpose i s
making new interpretation of time dilation from the equation (A) which should not be done because
some equations like equation (A) derived here are as wrong as special theory of relativity because
the equations derived here are based on the wrong assumption of the special theory of relativity.
The purpose of this proof is only to show the logical error in derivation of special theory of relativity
apart from the error of assuming wrong assumption. This proof serves its purpose (revealing logical
error in derivation of special theory of relativity) despite it is based on the wrong assumption
contained in special theory of relativity.

 Some interpretations based on special theory of relativity are wrong (described above).
 Lorentz transformations are wrong and wrongly derived/assumed.
 Mass and energy should be treated differently as different physical quantities. Mass energy
equivalence can/may be wrong.
FINALLY YOU CAN SEE THE PROOF BELOW WHICH DERIVES THE TRUE RESULT ASSUMING THE TRUE
ASSUMPTION AND WHICH ALSO VERIFIES THE WRONGNESS OF FUNDAMENTAL POSTULATE OF
SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY
 TRUE DERIVATION BASED ON TRUE ASSUMPTION WHICH CLEARS ALL DOUBTS

Suppose reference frame r1 travels at speed v with respect to reference frame r 2 as shown in figure
below, and a light ray travels from point C to A where a mirror reflects it and sends it to D. Thus light
ray travels from C to A to D at an angle  with respect to horizontal in reference frame r 1 .Suppose
time flow during the ray reaches from C to D in reference frame r1 is Δt1 and the time flow during the
ray reaches from C to D in reference frame r 2 is Δt2. Suppose speed of light in reference frame r 1 is c.

Now, (31)

(32)

Now, for reference frame r1:

(33)

Now, for reference frame r2:

For reference frame r2, horizontal distance y and light path x increases due to the motion of
reference frame r1 with respect to reference frame r2. From Δ ABC (or Δ ABD), the increase in the
horizontal distance can be found by considering the time interval equal to the time taken for ray to
reach from C to A (or A to D) which is equal to for reference frame r2. Therefore increase in the
horizontal distance

(34)

Here we will assume that speed of light can be different for different reference frames and simple
Galilean velocity addition is true for speed of light also.

Using Galilean velocity addition, speed of light for reference frame r 2 can be obtained as

speed of light in r2 √ (35)

√
(36)
 Applying Pythagorean relation for reference frame r2, we get

(37)

From equations (31), (34), (36) and (37), we get

( )

( )

cot ( cos sin )

cot ( cos sin )

cosec

cosec

cosec

( ) ( )
sin

From equation(33) putting

Dividing both sides by , we get

( )

( ) (38)

Above mentioned equation (38) can be considered a quadratic equation in variable ( ). We will try
√
to solve it using equation . Here and

√
 or

But is not acceptable solution in reality. One reason for rejection can be given
like this: Time always flows in positive direction. In other words, amount of time always keeps on
increasing. Hence and have always positive values. Therefore must have positive value.

But gives negative value for some range of and . Another reason can be given

like this: will have different value for different values of and . Even for a particular value of
characterizing a reference frame, there can be multiple values (possibly infinite) of , giving multiple
values (possibly infinite) of ratio . Hence for a particular reference frame having speed will have

multiple values (possibly infinite) of ratio because there can be multiple values (possibly infinite)
of . But this is not possible. It is completely against our common sense and what we observe in
reality. Therefore is not acceptable solution.

Hence only one solution is acceptable from the two solutions obtained above. The acceptable
solution is

This solution obtained above that is also consistent with intuitive common sense. It also
suggests that time flow in both reference frames remain same and time dilation does not exist.

In the derivation of the result obtained above, simple Galil ean velocity addition was used for speed
of light and the result obtained by using that Galilean velocity addition is consistent with intuitive
common sense. Hence above analysis verifies and validates that simple Galilean velocity addition is
true for the speed of light also. It also validates the fact that speed of light can be different in
different reference frames.

Conclusions:

 Galilean velocity addition works for speed of light also

 Speed of light can be different in different reference frames
 The fundamental assumption in special theory of relativity that speed of light is same in all
reference frames is wrong
 Special theory of relativity is wrong
 Time flow in both reference frame described above is same. This result can be extended to
all reference frames and we can say
 Time flow in all reference frames is same and time dilation does not exist

Author: Lalit Vadher E-mail: lalitvadher@gmail.com