WHY DOES THE STRUGGLE AROUND SRT CONTINUE TO THIS DAY?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29121/granthaalayah.v7.i1.2019.1050Keywords:
Epistemological Errors, Galileo Parametric Transformation, Space, Time, Theory of CognitionAbstract [English]
The purpose of this article is not to criticize the theory of relativity, but to try to understand why, despite more than a century of dominance in physics, it is constantly criticized by physicists. In this paper, a thorough analysis of A. Einstein's theory of relativity is carried out. It relies on philosophical, physical-mathematical, logical-historical methods of investigation. It is shown that in SRT there is an error in the physical interpretation of the mathematical formalism of the Lorentz transformation (epistemological error). Therefore, the interpretation of the SRT phenomena contains logical contradictions and paradoxes. It is also shown that a consistent interpretation can be given for the Lorentz transformation within the framework of classical space-time representations. It is established that the real speed of the relative motion of inertial reference frames in is greater than the speed entering the Lorentz transformation. A new explanation is offered for relativistic phenomena without violating logic and without paradoxes. The results are of great importance for the description of relativistic phenomena in physical theories, and also for applied disciplines, for example, for the theory of cyclic accelerators, etc.
Downloads
References
Crother S. (2017). “ON THE LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY OF THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY.” American Journal of Modern Physics, 6, 43-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajmp.20170603.12
Leus V. (2018). “CRITICAL COMMENTS ON THE PAPER ‘ON THE LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY OF THE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY’.” Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics, 6 925-931. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/jamp.2018.64079
Poincare ́ H. (1906). “SUR LA DYNAMIQUE DE L’E ́LECTRON.” Ren. Circ. Mat. Palermo, 21, 129-175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03013466
Lenin V. I. (2002). Materialism and Empirio-Criticism: Critical Comments on a Reactionary Philosophy (Univ. Press of the Pacific).
Kuligin V., Kuligina G., and Korneva M. (1994). “EPISTEMOLOGY ANDSPECIAL RELATIVITY.” Apeiron, 20, 21.
Panofsky W. and Phillips M. (1990). Classical Electricity and Magnetism (2nd ed., Dover Publ.).
Burshtein E. (2011). “ACCELERATORS OF CHARGED PARTICLES” Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Translation from Russian into English University Library of Nijmegen).
Alvager T., Farley F., Kjellman J., and Wallin J. (1964). “TEST OF THE SECOND POSTULATE OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY IN THE GEV REGION.” Physical Letters, 12(3), 260 -262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0031-9163(64)91095-9
Chubykalo A., and Kuligin V. (2018). “UNKNOWN CLASSICAL ELECTRODYNAMICS.” Boson Journal of Modern Physics, 4(2), 384-425.
Engels F. (1964). Dialectics of Nature (3rd ed. Progress Publishers).
Martínez A. (2004). “RITZ, EINSTEIN, AND THE EMISSION HYPOTHESIS.” Physics in Perspective, 6(1), 4-28 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00016-003-0195-6
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
With the licence CC-BY, authors retain the copyright, allowing anyone to download, reuse, re-print, modify, distribute, and/or copy their contribution. The work must be properly attributed to its author.
It is not necessary to ask for further permission from the author or journal board.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.