Empirical falsification of Einstein’s special relativity (SR) and general relativity (GR) by an experiment that compares three frames of reference

Einstein defined time as the length of the light path divided by the speed of light. According to this definition, time can only change if either the length of the light path or the speed of light changes. Einstein replaced this objective mathematical truth with his idea that not only is the speed of light constant but also the length of the light path, so Einstein was able to define a constant proper time t 0 in all frames of reference. However, treating distances as constant contradicts the physical definition of motion. Therefore, Einstein’s relativity not only violates mathematical and physical rules but also violates logical rules when it claims that the reason why clocks measure different times is that all clocks measure the same time t 0 . Einstein’s physical half-truth, which makes a false statement about the lengths of light paths, which cannot be constant, leads to contradictions with reality, which Einstein compensated for by mathematical corrections. This inevitably led to a mathematical pseudoreality that is described by theoretical physics according to Einstein’s idea. However, Einstein’s principle of relativity cannot be mathematically manipulated. If we compare at least three reference frames, we obtain contradictory results for the kinematic and gravitational time dilation. In this case, e.g., the paradox arises that an atomic clock must be able to count forward and backward at the same time. Comparing only two frames of reference, the proper time t 0 can be arbitrarily assigned to each of the two frames of reference without contradictions occurring. However, if an experimental setup is always chosen in such a way that at most two frames of reference are compared, and so Einstein’s relativity cannot be falsified, a systematic error is applied, and the experiment is scientifically worthless as far as the confirmation of Einstein’s relativistic SR and GR is concerned.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Physics Essays
Published
2024-12-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4006/0836-1398-37.4.281
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Relativity and Gravitational Theory
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.66
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Empirical falsification of Einstein’s special relativity (SR) and general relativity (GR) by an experiment that compares three frames of reference

Reiner Georg Ziefle
2 citations
Physics Essays
Relativity and Gravitational Theory
0.66
article

Empirical falsification of Einstein’s special relativity (SR) and general relativity (GR) by an experiment that compares three frames of reference

Reiner Georg Ziefle
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Einstein defined time as the length of the light path divided by the speed of light. According to this definition, time can only change if either the length of the light path or the speed of light changes. Einstein replaced this objective mathematical truth with his idea that not only is the speed of light constant but also the length of the light path, so Einstein was able to define a constant proper time t 0 in all frames of reference. However, treating distances as constant contradicts the physical definition of motion. Therefore, Einstein’s relativity not only violates mathematical and physical rules but also violates logical rules when it claims that the reason why clocks measure different times is that all clocks measure the same time t 0 . Einstein’s physical half-truth, which makes a false statement about the lengths of light paths, which cannot be constant, leads to contradictions with reality, which Einstein compensated for by mathematical corrections. This inevitably led to a mathematical pseudoreality that is described by theoretical physics according to Einstein’s idea. However, Einstein’s principle of relativity cannot be mathematically manipulated. If we compare at least three reference frames, we obtain contradictory results for the kinematic and gravitational time dilation. In this case, e.g., the paradox arises that an atomic clock must be able to count forward and backward at the same time. Comparing only two frames of reference, the proper time t 0 can be arbitrarily assigned to each of the two frames of reference without contradictions occurring. However, if an experimental setup is always chosen in such a way that at most two frames of reference are compared, and so Einstein’s relativity cannot be falsified, a systematic error is applied, and the experiment is scientifically worthless as far as the confirmation of Einstein’s relativistic SR and GR is concerned.

Physics EssaysVol. 37(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Relativity and Gravitational Theory
0.66
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.