Einstein’s velocity composition proven wrong: the complete proof

von Joseph A. Rybczyk

Einstein’s velocity composition proven wrong: the complete proof; revised
Joseph A. Rybczyk

In: The general science journal. 2004 – 14 S.

Die Forschungsgruppe G.O. Mueller nimmt in der Ergänzung des Kapitels 4 ihrer Dokumentation 2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen diese Arbeit von Joseph A. Rybczyk auf:

Auszug: „Perhaps the only other important point of interest is that involving the results for Einstein’s formula for speeds that are a small fraction of light-speed c. As can be seen in the graph of Figure 2, as the speeds drop below .2c, the curve from Einstein’s formula merges with the correct curve given by the millennium formula.

This would appear to indicate that it could be somewhat difficult to determine that Einstein’s formula is incorrect through experiments conducted in these lower ranges of speeds. On the other hand, the fact that Einstein’s formula closely approximates the correct values for instantaneous speeds could present itself as a source of confusion involving even those experiments in the higher speed ranges. With all of this in mind and taking into consideration the great difficulty the author experienced in the mathematical analysis involving velocity composition, it is no wonder that it took so long to uncover this discrepancy in Einstein’s theory.

5. Conclusion

The evidence presented in this paper provides overwhelming proof that Einstein’s velocity composition formula is invalid for it intended purpose involving uniform motion. Quite clearly, Einstein’s formula involves acceleration composition, and as demonstrated in this paper, is not entirely accurate in that application either. Moreover, in view of what was shown, and if relativistic principles are indeed valid, then only the millennium relativity formulas for acceleration composition, and velocity composition appear to be correct for each of these respective applications. The only still remaining unresolved issue in regard to this matter is that involving acceptance of this evidence by the scientific community. As the author has stated in the past, this evidence will not go away. Let it also be understood that the author is not requesting such corroboration in order to see if the presented evidence is correct. The author knows it is correct. Perhaps the scientific community needs to be reminded of its responsibility to society.

If Einstein’s theory is wrong, the tax paying public who ultimately funds most of the research that is conducted in the U.S. has a right to know about it. And what about our children and grandchildren in the universities? Are we going to, for political reasons, or out of just plain stubbornness, continue teaching them something that we know is wrong? How does this benefit the advancement of science in the U.S., and what does this portend for America’s future position in the highly competitive world of science?“



Die Kommentarfunktion ist geschlossen.