3. Philosophical implications of relativity

‘Philosophical implications of relativity’ looks at the counterintuitive implications of the special theory of relativity. It begins with time dilation and length contraction, wherein the measurements of spatial distances and temporal intervals appear to vary with the motion of the observer. The question of whether relativity allows for the possibility of time travel is raised and the so-called paradoxes of time travel are explored.

Special relativity as an account for a “special kind” of optical illusion

Although Einstein’s special theory of relativity (STR) is more than a century old, the relation to reality of its predictions, such as length contraction, for instance, still seems obscure. Here, it is argued that the STR, by reason of observer-dependence and the contradicting nature of its predictions, describes a particular relationship of an observer to reality. Thus, it is concluded that the STR should be looked at as an account for a special kind of optical illusion.

A New Thought Experiment on Relativistic Length Contraction

Relativistic length contraction is revisited and a simple but new thought experiment is proposed in which an apparent asymmetric situation is developed between two different inertial frames regarding detection of light that comes from a chamber to an adjacent chamber through a movable slit. The proposed experiment does not involve gravity, rigidity or any other dynamical aspect apart from the kinematics of relative motion; neither does it involve any kind of nonuniformity in motion. The resolution of the seemingly paradoxical situation has finally been discussed.

Einstein’s special relativity violates the constancy of the velocity c of light under one-way conditions and thus contradicts the behavior of electromagnetic radiation

On Earth, we always measure the constant velocity c of electromagnetic radiation. Einstein assumed the velocity c of light to be constant in all inertial frames and developed his theory of special relativity by considering a light beam that moves back and forth, whereby he derived transformations between the coordinates of two reference frames: A moving reference frame represented by the coordinate system k and the coordinate system k that is at rest with respect to k. However, by applying Einstein’s theory of relativity, with its postulates of relativistic time dilation and length contraction, to electromagnetic radiation that moves only in one direction, either in the direction of or in the opposite direction to a moving inertial frame, it is demonstrated that the constancy of the velocity c of light is not compatible with Einstein’s theory of special relativity. It becomes obvious that Einstein’s relativistic physics must be an unrealistic theory, and consequently, we need an alternative, nonrelativistic, explanation of the constancy of the velocity c of electromagnetic radiation measured on Earth, and for the special and general “relativistic” phenomena.

Relativity Tied to Repulsion Gravity

This article refutes the Time Dilation Equation and Length Contraction that are derived in the Special Theory of Relativity. The conclusion reached in this article is that Time Dilation and Length Contraction cannot be characterized by simple equations due to repulsion gravity. The conclusion follows from gravity being a natural force of repulsion rather than the assumption that gravity is an attraction force. That gravity is a repulsion force follows from the Sir Arthur Eddington experiment designed to prove that gravity affects light. Few looked at that experiment as anything other than proving Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity that suggested gravity would affect light. The experiment went beyond what most imagined it accomplished. It surely verified that gravity affects light. But it did more than that. The experiment showed that gravity is a force of repulsion and not attraction as most believed. That gravity is repulsion and not an attraction force indicates that the relativity time dilation equation derived in the Special Theory of Relativity is intractably undecidable likely subject to Godels Incompleteness theorems

Assessment of the relativistic rotational transformations

Rotational transformations describe relativistic effects in rotating frames. There are four major kinematic rotational transformations: the Langevin metric; Post transformation; Franklin transformation; and the rotational form of the absolute Lorentz transformation. The four transformations exhibit different combinations of relativistic effects and simultaneity frameworks, and generate different predictions for relativistic phenomena. Here, the predictions of the four rotational transformations are compared with recent optical data that has sufficient resolution to distinguish the transformations. We show that the rotational absolute Lorentz transformation matches diverse relativistic optical and non-optical rotational data. These include experimental observations of length contraction, directional time dilation, anisotropic one-way speed of light, isotropic two-way speed of light, and the conventional Sagnac effect. In contrast, the other three transformations do not match the full range of rotating-frame relativistic observations.

Derivations of Time Dilation using Two Different Lorentz-Type Transformations

The Lorentz transformation (LT) of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity (STR) leads to the prediction of time dilation and length contraction in moving rest frames. In addition, the relativistic velocity transformation (RVT) is derived from the LT by simply taking the ratios of its space and time coordinates, and this in turn guarantees satisfaction of Einstein's light-speed constancy postulate. The Global Positioning Transformation (GPS-LT) is similar to the LT but differs from it in a significant way, namely it does not lead to the space-time mixing characteristic of the LT. The way in which time dilation is derived from both transformations is compared and it is shown that only the GPS-LT is self-consistent with respect to this key prediction of relativity theory

Length contraction in special relativity is a logical contradiction

Length contraction predicted by special relativity, requiring that two observers in different inertial frames measure each other's rods shorter than his own, is shown to be a logical contradiction and therefore invalid.

Deformation Potentials: Towards a Systematic Way beyond the Atomic Fragment Approach in Orbital-Free Density Functional Theory

This work presents a method to move beyond the recently introduced atomic fragment approximation. Like the bare atomic fragment approach, the new method is an ab initio, parameter-free, orbital-free implementation of density functional theory based on the bifunctional formalism that treats the potential and the electron density as two separate variables, and provides access to the Kohn–Sham Pauli kinetic energy for an appropriately chosen Pauli potential. In the present ansatz, the molecular Pauli potential is approximated by the sum of the bare atomic fragment approach, and a so-called deformation potential that takes the interaction between the atoms into account. It is shown that this model can reproduce the bond-length contraction due to multiple bonding within the list of second-row homonuclear dimers. The present model only relies on the electron densities of the participating atoms, which themselves are represented by a simple monopole expansion. Thus, the bond-length contraction can be rationalized without referring to the angular quantum numbers of the participating atoms.