Discussion

Started 28th Aug, 2023

# Einstein is the greatest physicist since 1905, why his views on the most fundamental issues of theoretical physics and cosmology are rejected?

**1. On the “Field” concept of objective reality:**

Einstein in an August 10, letter to his friend Besso (1954):

*“I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept, i.e., continuous structure. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, (and of) the rest of modern physics”*A. Pais, Subtle is the Lord*…” The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein”*, Oxford University Press, (1982) 467,**2. On “Black Hole”:**

*"The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the "Schwarzschild singularities" do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters whose particles move along circular paths it does not seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The "Schwarzschild singularity" does not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light.*

*This investigation arose out of discussions the author conducted with Professor H. P. Robertson and with Drs. V. Bargmann and P. Bergmann on the mathematical and physical significance of the Schwarzschild singularity. The problem quite naturally leads to the question, answered by this paper in the negative, as to whether physical models are capable of exhibiting such a singularity."*, A. Einstein, The Annals of Mathematics, Second Series, Vol. 40, No. 4 (Oct., 1939), pp. 922-936

**3. On the Quantum Phenomena:**

*“Many physicists maintain - and there are weighty arguments in their favour – that in the face of these facts (quantum mechanical), not merely the differential law, but the law of causation itself - hitherto the ultimate basic postulate of all natural science – has collapsed”.*A. Einstein, “Essays in Science”, p. 38-39 (1934)

**4. On Gravitational Wave:**

Einstein dismissed the idea of gravitational wave until his death:

*“Together with a young collaborator, I arrived at the interesting result that gravitational waves do not exist, though they had been assumed a certainty to the first approximation,”*he wrote in a letter to his friend Max Born. Einstein's paper to the

*Physical Review Letters*titled

*“Do gravitational waves exist?”*; was rejected.

Arthur Eddington who brought an obscure Einstein to world fame, and considered himself to be the second person (other than Einstein), who understood General Relativity (GR); dismissed the idea of gravitational wave in the following way: "

*They are not objective, and (like absolute velocity) are not detectable by any conceivable experiment. They are merely sinuosities in the co-ordinate-system, and the only speed of propagation relevant to them is 'the speed of thought'".*A.S. Eddington, F.R.S., The Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character. The Propagation of Gravitational Waves. (Received October 11, 1922), page 268

## Most recent answer

Okay, I got your point. This is what I think. Common people are weak and naive. They need God to tell them what to do with their life and death, and heroes (superstars) to follow in every activity they are seriously involved including religions, sports, music and politics. Among these superstar spirits, some followers become prophets such that they can win powers and profits over others. Those prophets care for nothing about truth. Their only ambitions are to gain big powers and fortunes by building a big group of fans and followers. Also, there are a lot of cowers, who are afraid of being blamed and threatened by the big group of fans which may damage their positions and fortunes if they oppose to the superstars and the spirits. This includes those big shots in scientific fields such as Relativity and Quantum Physics.

## All replies (5)

Space and Time are nature quantities. They don’t change with anything at all. However, the Dimension of a corresponding identical object and Duration of a corresponding identical event are associated quantities of the object and event. They can change with local gravitational field because of the expansion of Wu’s Pairs (building blocks of the universe) caused by bombardment of the gravitons based on Graviton Radiation and Contact Interaction Theory complying with Gravity Affected Wu’s Spacetime Shrinkage Theory, as well as aging of the universe due to the attraction caused by Force of Creation in Wu’s Pairs complying with Aging Affected Wu’s Spacetime Shrinkage Theory and CMB radiation.

Einstein believed that Spacetime (potential energy), instead of a function of local gravitational field and aging of the universe, was born naturally and its curvature (acceleration) can drive the distribution of matter and energy. Einstein derived his theories including Special Relativity, General Relativity, Spacetime, Field Equations and Mass and Energy Conservation, all based on two wrong assumptions: (a) Light speed is always constant no matter the light sources and observers (reference points), and (b) Acceleration is the principle factor of general relativity and Spacetime.

In contrast, according to Yangton and Yington Theory, it is believed that (a) Light speed is not constant, instead, it is the vector summation of Absolute Light Speed C and Inertia Light Speed, and (b) Acceleration is not a principle factor, instead, gravitational field and aging of the universe are the principle factors of Wu’s Spacetime. In other words, the Dimension and Duration of an object or event are a function of Wu’s Unit Time (t

_{yy}) and Wu’s Unit Length (l_{yy}) of a reference corresponding identical subatomic particle depending on the local gravitational field and aging of the universe no matter of the acceleration (except that acceleration is solely due to gravitational field where only Einstein is right).Velocity is relative. In Twin Paradox, the observation of speed by one twin brother is totally identical to that of the other twin brother except in opposite directions. In addition, acceleration is also relative. Just like velocity to Special Relativity, acceleration can also be reversed in General Relativity. For example, a spaceship in a massive star is bigger and moves slower when observed on earth (compare to the same spaceship located and observed on earth). This observation agrees to both Einstein's General Relativity and Wu's Yangton and Yington Theory. However, when the observation is reversed, Einstein from the massive star will also see a bigger and slower spaceship on earth, but Wu will see a smaller and faster spaceship on earth due to earth less gravity. It is obvious there is a self conflict in Einstein’s general relativity. In fact, both dimension and duration of an object or event change only with gravitational field (also aging of the universe) instead of acceleration.

Ph.D. Full Member Sigma Xi Retired Independent Researcher Montréal ,

Edward Wu : The discussion here is about the question, why and how; despite being generally considered as the greatest physicist of modern times, Albert Einstein's specific views (listed above) on some of the most fundamental issues of modern theoretical physics and cosmology are rejected.

Unfortunately, there is no room for

*"Wu's Pairs"*or any others'*"Pairs"*for discussion in this forum. This is simply out of topic and of no interest. Please stay relevant to the topic, thanks.Okay let's ignore the Yangton and Yington Theory which is one possible mechanism of everything. Let's stick only with Why and How:

Space and Time are nature quantities. They don’t change with anything at all. However, the Dimension of an object and Duration of an event are associated quantities of the object and event. They can change with local gravitational field as well as aging of the universe.

Einstein believed that Spacetime (potential energy), instead of a function of local gravitational field and aging of the universe, was born naturally and its curvature (acceleration) can drive the distribution of matter and energy. Einstein derived his theories including Special Relativity, General Relativity, Spacetime, Field Equations and Mass and Energy Conservation, all based on two wrong assumptions: (a) Light speed is always constant no matter the light sources and observers (reference points), and (b) Acceleration is the principle factor of general relativity and Spacetime.

In contrast, it is believed that (a) Light speed is not constant, instead, it is the vector summation of Absolute Light Speed C and Inertia Light Speed, and (b) Acceleration is not a principle factor, instead, gravitational field and aging of the universe are the principle factors. In other words, the Dimension and Duration of an object or event are depending on the local gravitational field and aging of the universe no matter of the acceleration (except that acceleration is solely due to gravitational field).

Velocity is relative. In Twin Paradox, the observation of speed by one twin brother is totally identical to that of the other twin brother except in opposite directions. In addition, acceleration is also relative. Just like velocity to Special Relativity, acceleration can also be reversed in General Relativity. For example, a spaceship in a massive star is bigger and moves slower when observed on earth (compare to the same spaceship located and observed on earth). However, when the observation is reversed, Einstein from the massive star will also see a bigger and slower spaceship on earth. It is obvious there is a self conflict in Einstein’s general relativity. In fact, both dimension and duration of an object or event change only with gravitational field (also aging of the universe) instead of acceleration.

Ph.D. Full Member Sigma Xi Retired Independent Researcher Montréal ,

Edward Wu : Unfortunately, you still do not get the point I am trying to make, Mr. Wu! You fail to see the mega-irony involved in this question!

It is not the question of whether Einstein’s theories of relativity are right or wrong. I myself through journal publications have shown (scientifically, mathematically, philosophically) that Einstein’s theories of relativity are not scientific theories and have no basis in objective reality. My challenge to anybody (including a Nobel Laureate in theoretical physics) to prove me wrong, still remain unanswered., even after more than a year and all my opponents (who support Einstein’s theories) are in fact silenced now.

The real irony is that Einstein through his published works (cited above) denied (until his death), the possibility of “black hole”, “gravitational wave” etc., even in principle (based on his theories); while official and mainstream physicists in opposition to Einstein, attribute the very same things as the primary attributes of his theories. And not only that; they are “proving” those things to the credit of Einstein’s theories (in spite of Einstein!), through mega experiments, involving scientists from all-over the world and even earning Nobel Awards, in the bargain!

Okay, I got your point. This is what I think. Common people are weak and naive. They need God to tell them what to do with their life and death, and heroes (superstars) to follow in every activity they are seriously involved including religions, sports, music and politics. Among these superstar spirits, some followers become prophets such that they can win powers and profits over others. Those prophets care for nothing about truth. Their only ambitions are to gain big powers and fortunes by building a big group of fans and followers. Also, there are a lot of cowers, who are afraid of being blamed and threatened by the big group of fans which may damage their positions and fortunes if they oppose to the superstars and the spirits. This includes those big shots in scientific fields such as Relativity and Quantum Physics.

## Similar questions and discussions

Isn't the universe expanding?

- Giuseppe Pipino

A research by Prof. Juan De Vicente (CIEMAT, Madrid), author of dozens of publications in the field of astrophysics, was recently published (May 23), which demonstrates, in the opinion of the author, that the universe is not expanding and that the observed cosmological redshift must therefore be attributed to some other physical cause. For example, the decrease in the speed of light over time.

If Prof. De Vicente's research were confirmed, it would put an end to the Big Bang model that the recent observations of the JWST are strongly questioning.

I, not being an expert in astrophysics or statistics, am unable to understand the article in which De Vicente explains the methods and results of his research.

This is the link of the article:

Prof. De Vicente's research is based on the analysis of public data, published on the website:

therefore it is perfectly reproducible.

Is anyone interested in checking De Vicente's research and confirming/denying these results?

It goes without saying that if these data passed the examination of careful criticism they would represent a revolutionary result that would change the history of astronomy forever.

In the event that someone is about to do this check, could he explain exactly the steps taken (possibly limiting to a few dozen galaxies in order to make the method adopted clear) so that this check can also be performed by non-experts?

Quō Vādis Theoretical Physics and Cosmology?

- Abdul Malek

## Related Publications

A precise kinematical definition of the deformation of an arbitrary space or spacetime is considered. This approach introduces ``inertial criteria'' which, combined with the vacuum field equations of general relativity, lead to a unique class of solutions involving plane gravitational waves.

Joseph Weber of the University of Maryland believes he has observed gravitational waves from extraterrestrial sources (Phys. Rev. Letters 22, 1320, 1969). The gravitational‐wave detectors, sensitive to 1660 Hz, were stretched over a 1000‐km baseline between the Maryland campus and Argonne National Laboratory; they showed 17 significant coincidences...

Based on a presentation made at the 89th Spring Meeting of the AAVSO, April 15, 2000