EINSTEIN'S 1905 HOAX

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, by A. Einstein, June 30, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B."

This is a lie - the theory Einstein has just developed does not say anything about two clocks one of which (the clock initially at A) is not inertial during some period. The theory can only be applied if the moving clock has never been stationary, that is, if it has been moving with constant speed v all along.

Let us change the scenario so that Einstein's theory CAN be applied. We have a large system, with possibly many clocks spread out through it, which moves with constant speed v relative to the stationary clock at B.

As one of the moving clocks crosses the distance between A and B (and is checked against stationary clocks stationed there), stationary observers find it running more slowly than stationary clocks. So the theory says. This prediction is consistent with the traditional twin paradox interpretation taught by Einsteinians.

Yet the theory says more. As the stationary clock at B meets, consecutively, two moving clocks and is checked against them, moving observers find it running more slowly than moving clocks. This prediction contradicts the traditional twin paradox interpretation, as the following example shows.

Consider synchronous clocks (ants in the picture) travelling with constant speed along a rectangular line and passing a single stationary clock located in the middle of one of the sides of the rectangle:

http://www.wpclipart.com/page_frames...e_portrait.png

Einstein's relativity predicts that the single stationary clock runs more slowly than the travelling clocks, in the sense that the difference between the reading of the travelling clock just being met and that of the single stationary clock gradually increases with the number of meetings.

We have reductio ad absurdum: If a single clock is travelling and multiple clocks stationary, Einstein's relativity predicts that THE TRAVELLING CLOCK RUNS MORE SLOWLY (the traditional twin paradox interpretation). If the multiple clocks are travelling and the single clock stationary, Einstein's relativity predicts that THE STATIONARY CLOCK RUNS MORE SLOWLY (in contradiction to the traditional twin paradox interpretation).

In case of reductio ad absurdum, some underlying premise is false. In this case the falsehood is Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate. The speed of light (relative to the observer) does depend on the speed of the emitter, as predicted by Newton's emission theory of light.

Pentcho Valev