scholarly journals Special Relativity sans Lorentz Transformation (OR) Perceptional Relativity

Author(s):  
Sebastin Patrick Asokan

Abstract This paper shows that from the fact that the same Reality is perceived differently by the observers in different inertial frames, we can draw a simple and straightforward explanation for the constancy of light's speed in all inertial frames without any need for bringing in paradoxical Lorentz Transformation. This paper also proves that Lorentz Transformation has failed in its attempt to do the impossible task of establishing t' ≠ t to explain the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames without contradicting the interchangeability of frames demanded by the First Postulate of the Special Theory of Relativity. This paper also points out the misconceptions regarding the claimed experimental verifications of Lorentz Transformation's predictions in the Hafele–Keating experiment and μ meson experiment. This paper concludes that Einstein's Special Theory Relativity can stand on its own merits without Lorentz Transformation.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEBASTIN PATRICK ASOKAN

Abstract This paper shows that from the fact that the same Reality is perceived differently by the observers in different inertial frames, we can draw a simple and straightforward explanation for the constancy of light's speed in all inertial frames without any need for bringing in paradoxical Lorentz Transformation. This paper shows that the premise that each inertial frame has its unique time, which Lorentz Transformation introduced to explain the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames is incompatible with the interchangeability of the frames, an essential requisite of the First Postulate of the Special Theory of Relativity. This paper also points out the misconceptions regarding the claimed experimental verifications of Lorentz Transformation's predictions in the Hafele–Keating experiment and μ meson experiment. This paper hints at the possibility of attributing the observed slowing down of fast-moving clocks to the Relativistic Variation of Mass with Velocity instead of Time Dilation. This paper concludes that Einstein's Special Theory Relativity can stand on its own merits without Lorentz Transformation.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastin Patrick Asokan

Abstract This paper shows that if we accept that there is no absolute perception of Reality and the same Reality is perceived differently by different observers, then a simple and straightforward explanation for the constancy of Light's speed in all inertial frames of reference is possible without any need for paradoxical Lorentz Transformation. This paper also proves that Lorentz Transformation, as incorporated in the Special Theory of Relativity, is conceptually flawed. This paper also points out the misconceptions regarding the claimed experimental verifications of Lorentz Transformation's predictions in the Hafele–Keating experiment and μ meson experiment. This paper concludes that Einstein's Special Theory Relativity can stand on its own merits without Lorentz Transformation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Crothers

The special theory of relativity demands, by Einstein's two postulates (i) the principle of relativity and (ii) the constancy of the speed of light in vacuum, that a spherical wave of light in one inertial system transforms, via the Lorentz transformation, into a spherical wave of light (the Lorentz sphere) in another inertial system when the systems are in constant relative rectilinear motion. However, the Lorentz transformation in fact transforms a spherical wave of light into a translated ellipsoidal wave of light even though the speed of light in vacuum is invariant. The special theory of relativity is logically inconsistent and therefore invalid.


Author(s):  
James M. Hill ◽  
Barry J. Cox

We propose here two new transformations between inertial frames that apply for relative velocities greater than the speed of light, and that are complementary to the Lorentz transformation, giving rise to the Einstein special theory of relativity that applies to relative velocities less than the speed of light. The new transformations arise from the same mathematical framework as the Lorentz transformation, displaying singular behaviour when the relative velocity approaches the speed of light and generating the same addition law for velocities, but, most importantly, do not involve the need to introduce imaginary masses or complicated physics to provide well-defined expressions. Making use of the dependence on relative velocity of the Lorentz transformation, the paper provides an elementary derivation of the new transformations between inertial frames for relative velocities v in excess of the speed of light c , and further we suggest two possible criteria from which one might infer one set of transformations as physically more likely than the other. If the energy–momentum equations are to be invariant under the new transformations, then the mass and energy are given, respectively, by the formulae and where denotes the limiting momentum for infinite relative velocity. If, however, the requirement of invariance is removed, then we may propose new mass and energy equations, and an example having finite non-zero mass in the limit of infinite relative velocity is given. In this highly controversial topic, our particular purpose is not to enter into the merits of existing theories, but rather to present a succinct and carefully reasoned account of a new aspect of Einstein's theory of special relativity, which properly allows for faster than light motion.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
mohamed abouzeid

According to Einstein's first hypothesis only, it can be reached to transfer formats Between reference frames in the special theory of relativity


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEBASTIN ASOKAN

Abstract This paper pinpoints a severe infirmity of the Lorentz Transformation in the Special Theory of Relativity. Even if it were true, its ambit is very much limited. Out of infinite events happening in the universe, it covers only the events of detecting light signals at the spatial points lying on a straight line in the direction of the relative velocity between the two inertial frames. This paper points out that the slowing down of moving clocks is not a prediction of Lorentz Transformation and hints at the possibility of attributing the observed slowing down of fast-moving clocks to the Relativistic Variation of Mass with Velocity. This paper concludes that from the fact that the same Reality is perceived differently by the observers in different inertial frames, we can draw a straightforward explanation for the constancy of light's speed in all inertial frames without any need for bringing in narrow-scoped and unrealistic Lorentz Transformation.


Author(s):  
Dmitry S Kulyabov ◽  
Anna V Korolkova ◽  
Leonid A Sevastianov

When presenting special relativity, it is customary to single out the so-called paradoxes. One of these paradoxes is the formal occurrence of speeds exceeding the speed of light. An essential part of such paradoxes arises from the incompleteness of the relativistic calculus of velocities. In special relativity, the additive group is used for velocities. However, the use of only group operations imposes artificial restrictions on possible computations. Naive expansion to vector space is usually done by using non-relativistic operations. We propose to consider arithmetic operations in the special theory of relativity in the framework of the Cayley–Klein model for projective spaces. We show that such paradoxes do not arise in the framework of the proposed relativistic extension of algebraic operations.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 43-49
Author(s):  
Hamdoon A. Khan ◽  

With the consideration of the light which carries the photon particles, the Lorentz transformation was constructed with an impressive mathematical approach. But the generalization of that equation for all the velocities of the universe is direct enforcement on other things not to travel faster than light. It has created serious issues in every scientific research that was done in the last century based on the special theory of relativity. This paper replaces the velocity of light with some other velocities and shows us the possible consequences and highlights the issues of special relativity. If I travel through my past or future and was able to see another me there, who would be the real Hamdoon I or the one I see there in the past or future! If the real one is only me, the one I saw, is not me, so, I could not travel through my or someone else's past or future. Therefore, no one can travel through time. If both of us are the same, can the key of personal identity be duplicated or be separated into two or more parts? These are some of the fundamental philosophical arguments that annihilate the concept of time travel which is one of the sequels of special relativity.


Author(s):  
Geoff Cottrell

By the beginning of the twentieth century, our understanding of matter was completely transformed by the great discoveries of electromagnetism and relativity. ‘Energy, mass, and light’ outlines Einstein’s special theory of relativity of 1905, which describes what happens when objects move at speeds close to the speed of light. The theory transformed our understanding of the nature of space and time, and matter through the equivalence of mass and energy. In 1916, Einstein extended the theory to include gravity in the general theory of relativity, which revealed that matter affects space by curving space around it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shukri Klinaku

Is the special theory of relativity (STR) a “simple” or “tricky” theory? They who think that it is a simple theory say (i) that its postulates are simple, that Nature is such, (ii) that the mathematics of STR is perfect, and (iii) that experiments support it. I consider its two postulates to be very true, whereas the mathematics of the STR has a shortcoming, and, as for the experiments, the question must be posed: which theory do they support best? The problem for STR lies in the transition from its postulates to its basic equations, i.e., Lorentz transformation and the velocity addition formula. The passage from the principle of relativity and the constancy of the speed of light to the basic equations of the STR is affected by four fundamental errors—three physical and one mathematical. Continuous attempts to reconcile these latent mistakes have made STR increasingly tricky. As a result, it is in a similar situation to Ptolemy's geocentric model after “improvements” thereto by Tycho Brahe. However, the “Copernican solution” for relative motion—offered by extended Galilean relativity—is very simple and effective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document