Do you think the theory of relativity is correct?

There is someone who has problems with the theory of relativity. I will make up for the misunderstandings about the theory of relativity based on what he said. Try to explain it clearly, but I can still understand the special theory of relativity, but the general theory of relativity can only rely on the results. I am too poor in mathematics and I really can’t understand the general theory of relativity.

First of all, if you want to oppose the theory of relativity, you should at least look at the theory of relativity first.

Yes, you said that the speed of light is not constant. The theory of relativity did not say that the speed of light is constant at the beginning.

It is to first assume that the speed of light is constant, and then obtain the formula of the special theory of relativity through Lorentz transformation through the constant speed of light, and then use the special theory of relativity to predict physical phenomena in the real world. If the phenomena observed in this reality are consistent with the theoretical predictions If the phenomena are the same, then the assumptions in the theory are established. Obviously, the phenomena predicted by the special theory of relativity have now become facts. For example, the fifth term of the Taylor expansion of the theory of relativity is e=mc?

It is not that the speed of light must first be constant, but that the special theory of relativity must be obtained first. It is found that the speed of light is constant, and then the inference of the special theory of relativity is correct, and then the special theory of relativity is correct, and then the special theory of relativity is used to correctly deduce that the speed of light of the special theory of relativity is correct. Cause and effect cannot be confused.

Next, I see the counter-evidence you cited in the picture. The reference object you mentioned is the teaching method of junior high school physics. The theory of relativity uses the system as a reference. It’s not looking at b from place a, nor looking at a from place b.

The entire inertial system is used as the reference, and the starting point where a and b coincide is the reference point. Then the speed of a relative to this starting point is v1, and the speed of b relative to this starting point is v2. In the real world, two celestial bodies naturally do not have this starting point, but based on the movement in a certain direction, a similar reference point can be obtained. Such slow objects are naturally slower relative to this reference point, and fast objects are naturally faster than this reference point. There is nothing like standing on the earth and looking at the moon. The moon is faster and time is slower. Standing on the moon and looking at the earth, on the earth The Paradox of Slower Speed.

Let’s talk about black holes again

At my level, I can understand the special theory of relativity, but black holes are part of the general theory of relativity. Both are theories of relativity but not on the same level. In Einstein's own words, if I hadn't discovered the special theory of relativity, someone would have discovered it sooner or later, but only I could have discovered the general theory of relativity. What people around the world couldn't understand at that time was not the special theory of relativity but the general theory of relativity. It is not difficult to understand the special theory of relativity. It is recommended that those who are interested can look for the paper and read it themselves.

I myself don’t understand the mathematical demonstration process of general relativity. I can’t explain it clearly. I can just talk about the inference. The greater the gravity, the slower time will be.

The gravitational force of the black hole is very huge, so the △t of the black hole is very, very small, and x = v × △t. The speed of light does not change at all, but the △t of the black hole becomes 0. It is also possible It's not 0, it's something else that we humans can't understand for the time being.

Time is frozen, just like pressing pause. The speed of the object does not change, so the distance does not change.

If black holes are difficult to understand, I will just give the example of the earth and the sun.

We all know that the earth revolves around the sun, but the earth is not a point, but has a size. According to the theory of circular motion, the angular speed is the same. The closer the particle is to the sun, the slower it is. The farther, the faster the speed, and the distance traveled by the place on the earth that is closer to the sun is shorter when it also circles the sun.

Anyone who has studied physics can understand the above.

Then the question arises. If the earth is rotating, does the speed of every point on the earth relative to the sun change every moment? If the sun suddenly disappears, at what point will the speed of the earth be measured?

If you think about it in terms of the theory of relativity, you will understand. The speed of all points on the earth is the same, but the gravity is greater where it is closer to the sun, so time is slower, so the speed on the side closer to the sun is greater. The distance the point moves is smaller.

In fact, this is the reason why objects move in circles. Where the gravity is greater, time slows down.

If the sun slowly turns into a black hole, and the gravity becomes stronger and stronger, the time becomes smaller and smaller, and the final distance moved becomes 0. Things that fall into the black hole cannot come out, but the speed does not change.

In fact, we will never see an object fall into a black hole, and the object will not fall into the black hole through motion, because the closer the object is to the black hole, the slower the time will be and the smaller the distance it moves, but it is If you cannot reach a black hole, time will no longer exist when you reach the black hole. It cannot be said to be 0. There should be no theory that can describe what it would be like if time did not exist.

Is the theory of relativity correct? It's a very good question, and I'll just add a few knowledge points. Everyone makes their own judgment.

In 1905, the German physics magazine "Annals of Physics" published a series of papers written by a young Swiss clerk named Albert Einstein, three of which " It can be called the greatest work in the history of physics." One article used the quantum theory just proposed by Planck to explain the photoelectric effect, making the birth of television possible, and he also won a Nobel Prize; one article discussed the situation of suspended small particles (now called Brownian motion) Prove that atoms do exist; an article "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" outlines the special theory of relativity and completely changes the world.

But the famous equation E=mc2 does not appear in this paper. It will be mentioned in a short supplement a few months later.

The reason why special relativity is "narrow" is that it does not include gravity; and the paper "Cosmological Thoughts on General Relativity" published in early 1917 incorporated gravity into the system and completed the final One piece of the puzzle, Einstein's universe is complete.

Simply put, the content of the theory of relativity is: space and time are not absolute, only the speed of light in vacuum is absolute, and everything can change around the assumption that the speed of light remains constant. We can never accelerate ourselves to the speed of light; the closer we get to the speed of light, the more distorted our appearance appears to an observer.

To be scientific, nothing more than to use experimental data to demonstrate whether the conjectures and predictions of this theory are consistent. Then everyone went through a fierce operation to compare the data for any discrepancies, and then changed the theory when it was time to change it, and won the Nobel Prize when it was time to do so. It was as simple and crude as that. There is no need to explain the meaning and purpose of thinking about the philosophy of life.

In the 400-year history of scientific experiments, the second best agreement between theory and experimental data is the experimental results (electron quantum electrodynamics) after Feynman Dyson's "renormalization" method After QED is renormalized) in the calculation of the electron magnetic moment, it is consistent with the experimental data to the eleventh decimal place. This experiment verifies quantum mechanics.

The number one ranking, claimed to be the most accurate physical theory in history, is the proof of the existence of gravitational waves observed by the "Hels-Taylor" pulsar system, which makes the accuracy of general relativity consistent with experimental results. 10 to the power of negative fourteen.

Yes, this experiment was suspected of cheating for several years because it was so consistent that it was ridiculous.

The idea of ??"what do I think will happen" is not suitable for scientific discussion. Whoever doubts should provide evidence. It is common sense to pick up mathematical tools, give a model, and then conduct experiments to prove it. .

Science is not mysterious at all, but it has its rules of the game. Science is never afraid of questioning, because every progress is the result of brave young people who rise up to question.

But please remember, whoever questions is the one who provides evidence. The police station no longer helps issue proof documents, right?

I am Mr. Cat, thank you for reading.

The theory of relativity is of course a correct theory. The theory of relativity and quantum mechanics jointly laid the foundation of modern physics and can be said to be the two pillars of the current physical science community.

The theory of relativity was proposed by Einstein in 1905. It can be said that the theory of relativity is a cross-century theory. Because when the theory of relativity was proposed, it caused an uproar in the physical science community.

Why is the theory of relativity said to be a cross-century theory? This is also related to the fact that the theory of relativity did not win the Nobel Prize in Physics, because the theory of relativity seemed very profound at the time, including relative time in the theory of relativity, the mass-energy equation of the speed of light, and the gravitational field theory. The reviewers of the Nobel Prize in Physics couldn't understand it, so they didn't dare to award Einstein's theory of relativity.

The theory of relativity can be divided into general theory of relativity and special theory of relativity.

General relativity mainly explains the macroscopic universe, mainly involving gravity.

The special theory of relativity is exactly the opposite of the general theory of relativity. It mainly explains problems that have no gravitational effect and do not need to consider the influence of gravity. First of all, the relative time in the theory of relativity has been realized, including the current GPS and time positioning, which all use the relative time in the theory of relativity. Relative time explains that our time periods in the universe are different. That is to say, time will slow down where the gravity is strong, and time will go faster where the gravity is small, so time on satellites in space will be faster than on the earth, so we have to always use Einstein Stein's relative time equation is used to correct the time on the satellite and on the earth, so that the clocks on the satellite and the earth are consistent.

If you like it, don’t forget to follow and subscribe to us! ——The history of time.

Objectively speaking, the theory of relativity and all previous theories cannot be completely correct! But the theory of relativity, a theory based on assumptions, does have too many abnormalities, which cannot but arouse everyone's deep suspicion. If there is no doubt, it can only mean that human beings no longer have the soul to pursue progress! The fate of mankind can only be left to some theories that may not follow the laws of nature.

We can now list some doubts for your reference:

1. Observations prove that there are many doubts about the theory of relativity

Eddington said that astronomical observations have proved that there are serious problems with the theory of relativity. Doubtful point: Eddington's observation team observed that a distant star deviated from its supposed position at a certain angle during a total solar eclipse, and inferred that the star's light was bent by the sun to prove the correctness of the theory of relativity.

First of all, we don’t have to consider whether Eddington has selfish motives. From a normal person’s point of view, is this observation the only conclusion that must be inferred that the light of the star behind is bent by gravity? Not really! Because the atmosphere around the sun can completely affect the light, causing the observation results to deviate from the original position. Moreover, we already have ready-made factual basis for the refraction of light by air.

Secondly, in this case, the Eddington team did not actively analyze the possible reasons, but made a hasty conclusion and published this conclusion through the Royal Academy, which is also an abnormal practice. , the normal practice should be to publish the observation results in newspapers and magazines, and solicit opinions from all walks of life in order to make further conclusions. All this shows that there are serious flaws in the relevant practices and review procedures of Eddington and the Royal Academy.

2. The speed of light remains unchanged

Now we have understood the essence of the constant speed of light. In fact, the speed of light is the speed of a wave, which is the speed of a material energy wave. It is the same concept as a mechanical wave. The wave speed is determined by the propagation medium rather than the carrier from which the energy wave is emitted. Since the speed of energy waves is essentially different from the speed of objects in the classical mechanical theory system, the speed of light cannot participate in the calculation of classical theoretical speed. However, the theory of relativity deduces the conclusion in this way, so it can be seen that the conclusion deduced by the theory of relativity is unscientific.

3. Mass-energy formula

The mass-energy formula E=MC^2 derived from the theory of relativity is not as universal as Newton's theory and cannot prove why ordinary matter cannot be like uranium. Used to make atomic bombs! Therefore, it has no theoretical value and should be forging evidence to prove the correctness of the theory of relativity.

These doubts should guide people to explore the essence of the theory of relativity. I hope people will recognize the true face of the theory of relativity as soon as possible and take measures to solve the problem.

Unfortunately, because the theory of relativity is included in school textbooks, public officials who want to keep their jobs will never dare to speak out against it. Even if some teachers understand the pseudo-theoretical essence of the theory of relativity, they still You can only use your conscience to teach according to the teachings in the textbooks. The same is true for national formal scientific research institutes. If you do not stand in support of the theory of relativity, you will be suppressed by all forces and unable to gain a foothold.

This is especially true for major newspapers and magazines. No article opposing the theory of relativity can be reviewed and published in regular publications! It seems that the unfortunate thing is not just a little bit, but the paper publishing system is also unfortunate! If we were more open-minded, perhaps the shortcomings of the theory would have been exposed long ago, and the ideological control of pseudo-scientific theories could have been ended in advance.

However, today’s new media is a place where people dare to speak out. Perhaps the ills left over from the old era can only be eliminated through such new era tools!

I don’t think it’s correct.

Mainly the passage of time. In order to keep the speed of light constant, the speed of time is made into a spring...

How to put it, time is a historical concept, or it is The concept of calendar, or astronomical concept... If you look closely at history, you will find this problem: time actually originates from humans, or to be more rigorous, it is the subjective view of life on the rotation of day and night and the change of seasons caused by the rotation and revolution of the earth. Description...at least there is no problem at the level of "hour", which is the hour and time we are talking about.

Then, time is divided here: the bigger one is called day, month, year, year, century, era...etc., which are mostly used in history and geography; the smaller one is called Go ahead and call hours, minutes, seconds...the more divided you are, the more precise you are. It is mostly used in physics and chemistry...But, no matter whether you go into a large file or subdivide it into a small one, the source of this concept is here - —A subjective description of astronomical phenomena caused by the rotation and revolution of the earth...

Although it is used a lot, it is not actually a physical quantity...

You are pulling and pressing here. Is... appropriate?

As for the fact that many people pulled out the GPS to talk about it when they heard it, in fact, it is reasonable to explain that high-speed movement or space environment affects the accuracy of the timer or the operation of the timer... because we I didn’t realize that the device disappeared for a period of time... Five seconds passed when the ring was on the ground, but it only showed that it had passed four seconds. What is this called? This equipment malfunctions... Unless it disappears every five seconds, this is a time change...

There are also hotter gravitational waves. How do you call this thing? Then the two black holes merge and the mass changes. Corresponding to the change of gravity, the changing gravity forms changing fluctuations. This is reasonable and does not fall outside the circle of classical mechanics...

No matter how hot the black hole is, the existence of this thing is also recognized under the classical mechanics system... …

Look, what else is there? The above is a macroscopic example. If we break it down to a microscopic level, we can see that neutrinos moving at high speeds have a long lifespan, so time is a spring... How do you say this conclusion? Think about it for yourself. It is interesting. Think of the lifespan of neutrinos as It is fixed. It lives longer when it moves and dies faster when it stops. This shows that time is a spring... Why can't we admit that neutrinos in high-speed motion themselves exist longer than static ones?

So, the theory of relativity at least does not convince me that it is right.

The distance between my level of knowledge and understanding of the theory of relativity is like the distance between the provincial governor and the village chief. I once wanted to understand the theory of relativity, but found that I could not understand its prefixes. No one gave me the courage to decide whether relativity was right or wrong. Lao Ai's fault is that he added e=mc^2, which makes some people think it is quite simple to understand, and they have the idea of ????refuting it. Most people are not capable of judging whether the theory of relativity is right or wrong. Even if they are forced to judge, it is superstitious. There is no logical and reasoning argument. Anyway, there are only two possibilities of right and wrong, which is basically nonsense.

1. The clock slowing effect of relativity theory is wrong.

For example, if a spacecraft close to the speed of light moves away from the earth at a constant speed, both the people on the spacecraft and the people on the earth will observe each other's time slower, but the actual time in the sub-light speed spacecraft and Actual time on Earth does not slow down at all. The reason is that when the spacecraft flies at a constant sub-light speed, whether the earth is used as the reference frame or the spacecraft is used as the reference frame, it is the same. If the actual time on the earth does not slow down, the actual time on the spacecraft will never slow down. Only the time observed by the spacecraft and the earth will slow down.

The clock slowing effect of relativity misled many people (including me in the early days). I used to really think that the actual time in a sublight speed spacecraft would slow down, so I wrote an article saying: In the future, we will travel to a planet 20 light years away from the earth, and it will take 40 years to go back and forth. There is no need to bring 40 years of travel time. A year's worth of food and daily necessities is enough to carry for two or three days. The reason is that all physical, chemical, and biological changes will slow down when people sit on a light-speed spacecraft. After you return to Earth, your peers will become gray-haired old people, but you will still be as young as 40 years ago. Now I think this statement is very ridiculous.

2. The theory of relativity that mass can be converted into energy is also wrong.

As we all know, in the nuclear fusion reaction, two deuterium nuclei attract each other under the strong nuclear force, accelerate the collision, and fuse to generate a helium nucleus. The two deuteron nuclei release huge amounts of energy during the work process. of nuclear energy. Before the reaction, the two deuteron nuclei have two protons, two neutrons and two electrons. After the reaction, a helium nucleus also has two protons, two neutrons and two electrons outside the nucleus. Although two deuterons perform work during the reaction and release huge nuclear energy, the mass does not change before and after the reaction. How can we say that the mass is lost?

For another example, when electrons and positrons collide and annihilate, In addition to releasing huge energy, dark matter such as neutrinos and neutrinos is also generated. How can we say that the mass is lost?

3. The mass-energy equation E=mC^2, some people It is thought that any substance with a mass of m kilograms has mC^2 Joules of energy hidden inside. Therefore, if m kilograms of mass are lost, mC^2 Joules of energy will be released. Some people also believe that any substance m kilograms has a kinetic energy of mC^2 joules when moving at the speed of light C.

Because we have not found any violation of the law of conservation of mass (that is, the law of immortality of matter) in real life. The phenomenon that the motion of matter is equal to the speed of light does not even exist. So E=mC^2 is useless in actual physical calculations.

A brief impression of the theory of relativity

If you have never read the theory of relativity, you probably won’t understand it even if you do.

I have seen Einstein’s explanation of relativity in a vivid way.

Someone asked Einstein what is the theory of relativity?

Einstein said: The theory of relativity is like kissing your lover, but the time is very long but it feels very short; it is also like sitting on a hot stove, but the time is short but it feels very short. long.

Once Einstein and Chaplin met and complimented each other. Einstein said: You are the greatest artist in the world. The only reason you are great is that all of us can understand your performance without saying a word.

Chaplin said: You are the greatest scientist in the world. The only reason you are great is that you have said so many theories that none of us can understand.

The correctness of any theory is relative. Newtonian classical mechanics is correct when viewed in low-speed motion, macroscopic realm, and three-dimensional space. However, it is wrong when viewed in high-speed motion, microscopic realm, and four-dimensional space.

Einstein’s theory of relativity studies the laws of matter moving at high speed (speed of light), in the microscopic realm, and in four-dimensional space. At this level, the theory of relativity is correct.

In the future, when human scientific research reaches five- and six-dimensional spaces, the theory of relativity may be wrong again.

Therefore, the correctness of any theory is relative, and there is no eternally correct theory.

The theory of relativity does not answer: What is matter? What is energy?

As a bridge between "classical mechanics" and "quantum mechanics", the theory of relativity is unclear in concept and requires innovative development.

The fall geology theory believes that matter is formed by the polymerization of metallic hydrogen ions; the high-speed flowing matter in the magnetic field is converted into metallic hydrogen ions, and the "magnetic moments" of the metallic hydrogen ions cut and aggregate to form new ones. The elements simultaneously release electromagnetic waves - energy.

In thermonuclear reactions, mass is conserved and matter is not converted into energy.

The theory of relativity is most likely wrong! First of all, because its theoretical basis, the assumption of constant speed of light, is inconsistent with objective reality. At present, the experimental data on the constant speed of light that humans have are only the speed of light in the atmosphere on the earth's surface. For example, the MM experiment and the light aberration at the zenith of the celestial body are equal. Secondly, time cannot change its own loss rate and direction due to any factors; thirdly, time and space cannot change or bend due to differences in the strength of the gravitational field! Essentially, a one-dimensional object can bend in two and three dimensions, or a two-dimensional object can bend in three dimensions.

But it is impossible for a three-dimensional object to bend in three-dimensional space!

Just like the so-called black hole theory, the speed of light moving inside a black hole cannot be constant. Non-radial light can be said to move in a curve, but radial light should not move in a curve! If the light moving in the radial direction cannot escape from the black hole, it can only decelerate to 0 before it can get out!

Interested friends can learn more about my following articles.