|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Einstein's Relativity Predicts No Time Travel
Einsteinians brainwash the gullible world:
https://cosmosmagazine.com/physical-...l-through-time "This is the easiest and most practical way to get to the far future - go really fast. According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, when you travel at speeds approaching the speed of light, time slows down for you relative to the outside world." http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ry?id=32191481 Neil deGrasse Tyson: "We have ways of moving into the future. That is to have time tick more slowly for you than others, who you return to later on. We've known that since 1905, Einstein's special theory of relativity, which gives the precise prescription for how time would slow down for you if you are set into motion." Einstein's relativity predicts just the opposite: Time will SPEED UP "for you" if you are set into motion. You will discover this by comparing the rate of your clock with the rate of a clock which has remained at rest. Here is the original hoax: http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ ON THE ECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, A. Einstein, 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." Why is the moving clock slow and the stationary one fast? No such asymmetry follows from Einstein's 1905 postulates. What validly follows is that the moving clock is slow as judged from the stationary system, and the stationary clock is slow as judged from the moving system. Einstein's conclusion above (the moving clock "lags behind" the stationary one) is invalid - it does not follow from the postulates. So even if Einstein's 1905 postulates were true (actually the second one is false), time travel into the future remains impossible, no matter how fast one is moving. Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Einstein's Relativity Predicts No Time Travel
Paralyzing absurdity in Einstein schizophrenic world:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David Morin, Cambridge University Press, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back. (...) For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B does observe A's clock running slow, but enough strangeness occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older. Note, however, that a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox..." That is, all along, the travelling twin observes himself aging faster than his sedentary brother, but, as the travelling twin turns around for a very brief period, strangeness occurs and his distant sedentary brother suddenly gets very old and dies. In terms of degree of absurdity, this is equivalent to "The greenness of the crocodile exceeds its length." The two statements are equally difficult to defeat with rational arguments. Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
EINSTEIN'S TRAVEL INTO THE FUTURE | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 0 | December 5th 14 08:56 AM |
ABSURD TIME DILATION IN EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 2 | September 15th 14 11:46 PM |
About Time Travel and The Time Travel Paradox | mathematician[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 8th 13 09:03 AM |
General Relativity, Going Strong at 92: Time Travel and Dark Energy | Physics_Made_easy | Misc | 5 | September 7th 07 07:47 PM |
General Relativity, Going Strong at 92: Time Travel and Dark Energy | physics_Made_Easy | Astronomy Misc | 0 | September 6th 07 11:16 PM |