Content uploaded by Özgen Ersan

Author content

All content in this area was uploaded by Özgen Ersan on Feb 16, 2021

Content may be subject to copyright.

1

General Theory of Relativity Contravenes Special Relativity

Özgen Ersan

(zgnrsn@gmail.com)

Abstract: The general theory of relativity has disabled the Galilei relativity principle

(necessity about inertial frame), which is a postulate of the special theory of relativity while it

generates the gravitational lens phenomenon. Since the gravitational lens phenomenon was

confirmed, a foundation of the Special Relativity theory disappears. Each falsification

requires new hypothesis: The method of "Light Coordinate System" makes the special theory

of relativity more functional for light kinematics and cosmological analyses.

Keywords: Gravitational lens; Inertial frame; Light Coordinate System; LCS Method.

Introduction

As known, the special theory of relativity (SR) requires the condition of uniform motion of

the body; according to the Galilei relativity principle, if the light source moves with a linear

and constant speed, it can be considered as an inertial frame. In the easy explanation of SR,

when the train travels with a linear and constant speed, it is processed as if it is stationary, and

based on the opinion that the light moves away from the light source in the train with the

relative speed value ' c ', hence, it is inferred that the units of time and length dimensions

must change.

To generalize “the special” was a serious necessity. In order to achieve this, in the theory of

general relativity (GR), it was theoretically studied that acceleration is identified with gravity

and the gravitational lens phenomenon was proposed as an inference of this theory. The

gravitational lens was proven during the solar eclipse in 1919, and this result is cited as a

proof for the special theory of relativity. However, it is interesting that the Galilei relativity

principle has been ignored for this inference of general relativity.

Theoretical analysis and synthesis

In the general theory of relativity, the reason of the gravitational lens phenomenon was

explained as accelerating. However, the same logic of GR require inclined/diagonal path

(instead of the curved path) for the photon when the acceleration is also zero. So, gravitational

lenses will be formed again (figure 1).

According to GR, When a photon is sent from a light source at the S point on a wall in the

cabinet in a horizontal direction, the cabin will also travel upwards a little during the time

required for the photon to reach the opposite wall and the photon will appear on the P1 point.

The observer in the cabin combines the photon path in his mind as an SP1 diagonal; If the

cabin is accelerating, same mentality requires the curving path (SP2).

2

Whereas, if the acceleration is zero, the photon’s way must be horizontal like SP0 according to

SR mentality (SR declares that perpendicular photon is ineffectiveness because of projection).

Other, If we consider the light/outmost frame (LCS/space) as the role of reference frame, the

photon’s path is detected as a horizontal line like S’P0 for the observer. In GR observer’s

opinion is erroneous. In essence of Galilei relativity principle, a body gets an additional speed

from reference frame's speed as a first speed. But a photon has not a measured mass and the

photon cannot get an additional (vertical component) from cabinet's speed. This status is a

serious claim of SR mentality.

Figure 1- The photon’s path in concepts of SR, GR, LCS

SR’s claim (a = 0): Horizontal path SP0

GR’s claim (a = 0): Diagonal path SP1

GR’s claim (a > 0): Curved path SP2

LCS’s claim (a =/≠ 0): Horizontal path S’P0

We see that the Galilei principle of relativity is suspended in GR. When we remember the

practical explanation of this principle: "It is taken into account that a pebble that is dropped

freely -from the ship observation mast- it will fall to the bottom of the mast - in the uniform

motion of the ship"; that is, this result is as if the ship is stationary (inertial frame). If the ship

has acceleration, the pebble falls to a different point from the bottom of the pole and the

inertial frame option which is the target of the principle, will be violated. When we consider

an emitted photon in the vertical direction instead of pebble, SR says that the photon will

point to the bottom of the pole in accordance with the Galilei principle of relativity, while GR

says that it will reach the back of the pole (Figure-2). Yes, the pebble acquires a horizontal

initial velocity component from the speed of the ship because of its mass as a body. The

essence of the event is this "transferring first speed component". SR claims when a ship

travels by a fixed speed and linearly can be used as an inertial frame (ie. the vertically

3

oriented photon will point the bottom of the mast), while GR says that the photon will point

the back of the mast - even when the ship is moving uniformly; It has been said indirectly that

the Galilei principle of relativity is invalid in the photon-body motion relationship.

Figure 2 – GR claims that SR’s postulate (about inertial frame) does not work.

Photon’s path for SR : S’P’

Photon’s path for GR: S’P1

Photon’s path for LCS: SP1

Since the SR admits that the photon will not be affected by the speed of its source, how does

the photon go to a different point from the bottom of the pole? Since this gravitational lens

prediction of GR has been proven, doesn't one of the main postulates of the SR become

ineffective?

LCS (Light Coordinate System: Light Coordinate System) method

In science the some signals require new hypothesis. The "Light Coordinate System" method,

which can explain all such incompatibilities in GR and SR, will assist for Light kinematics

and Cosmological analyses: According to this method [1]:

1.- First point of the photon A (xa; ya; za; Ta) is marked on LCS or space. The local objects

(source or observer) cannot be used for marking. Light is a universal reality, and the

processing framework should be the outermost (most capacious) frame (space = LCS).

2.- The light source passes through point A at the instant of Ta.

3.- The photon moves away from point A with the speed of c, its source with the speed Vu

(Vu is the speed of the light source relative to the LCS).

4

4.- The speed of light is constant and it is c ‘. Light does not accelerate to obtain this speed.

5.- The photon travels in a straight line; its path can be bent by gravity.

6.-The photon does not get any additional component from the speed of its source. Nature has

a similar event (Lake surface analogy): The lake surface represents outer space or LCS; the

experimenter dropped the pebble (he represents the light source); the ring wave (represents

the light) formed on the lake surface (Figure: 3).

Figure 3- Lake surface analogy

7.- The distance between the photon and its source increases with the vectorial velocity c +/-

Vu; position is like the relationship of "a player and a ball" (hypothetical relativity). The

source/player can freely get new positions after sending the photon/ball.

8.- The upper limit of velocity in hypothetical relativity is 2c ‘. The diameter of the light

sphere -whose radius grows with the velocity c- grows with 2c (limit 2c is valid without

observer and this is within human cognitive capacity).

9.- When the speed of light is measured with the current measurement system (mirrored

double path and continuous photon flowing), the value of c is always found. The value c is the

velocity of the photon in terms of exact/genuine relative to LCS (not relative velocity

according to its source). One-way speed measurement for light should be perform. To find

the speed of moving away for a photon from its source (ie. c +/- Vu) must be organized a one

way experiment [2].

10.-The observer cannot be an actor of light kinematics analysis; because, his vision capacity

is limited by c value. However, light / photon always comes to the observer’s eye by c speed

(Figure 4). Astronomical observation data necessarily include an observer component; the

observer's component belongs to the present time and the target object's component belongs to

the past time. In cosmological analysis, it should be noted that the resultant data does not have

scientific integrity.

In the applied cosmological analysis made with the LCS method, the actual age of the

universe has been calculated as 19.28 billion years; universe’s radius has been calculated as

13.43 billion light years [3].

5

Figure 4- Light arrives to observer with the speed

Discussion

1- GR ignores Galilei relativity principle while it wants to generalize SR; whereas, this

principle is one of SR's two elemental / essential postulates. Besides, SR says that the

perpendicular photon (according to rails) does not cause to revise units of length and time

because of projection. SR and GR cause confusing.

2- The analysis actor (test subject) must be considered as a single/identified photon; also we

must use a perforated plate filter for directing the photon. Similar disciplines prevent the

automatic processes of brain like in GR (brain may paraconsciously combines the points S

and P1).

3- However, we may think that SR has consistent in itself. Because SR and LCS say that the

paths of photon are horizontal. But the path is SP0 for SR; and the path is S'P0 for LCS (Fig.1)

4- SR marks the point of starting of the photon with the presence of the source. To prefer a

tangible reference frame is a mechanical habit; therefore SR had neglected to assign a

common reference frame. Whereas space or LCS is functional reference frame (at least the

surface of a sheet of paper) for light kinematics and cosmological analyses.

5- We may comprehend that to decide the subject of an analysis or theory has significance. If

SR would aim light kinematics, probably the method of LCS would be generated; whereas SR

verified the concept of Fitzgerald contraction that supported/revived the aether paradigm.

6- The photon never can acquire an initial velocity component from the moving body. Galilei

relativity principle is valid for the relationship of masses. Newton's third action-reaction law

does not work for photon-body/mass relationships because of the same reason.

7- To accept every measured speed as the meaning of the speed of moving away from its first

reference frame is also a mechanical habit. The measured value of light's velocity 'c' may be a

speed according to only outmost frame (space: Reference frames are ranking in hierarchical

6

order). This is possible and in the comprehending capacity of human's mind. To find the same

value for every directions is a powerful evidence.

8- Acceleration does not become an argument to generalize the SR; because gravitational lens

realized without acceleration. The reason of the gravitational lens may be gravity; since the

photon travels electromagnetically. In any case, only gravity is taken into account as a factor

in the prediction of black hole formation.

9- SR considered the motion relationship of the photon and its source as a car and its road

relation (genuine relativity). However, this relationship (photon and its source) is like a

player-ball relationship (hypothetical relativity) in accordance with LCS mentality. The light

velocity measurement experiment (mirrored double paths and continuous photon flowing) can

also measure the universal velocity of light in space (cannot measure the velocity of moving

away from its source) due to its set-up; for all directions, the same result is an experimental

evidence. These two nuances are the weakest points of SR and GR.

10- SR had analysed the motion of the photon which travels only towards + x direction like its

source. Methodology requires all of directions. SR declares the “ineffectiveness” for

perpendicular photon because of projection. Whereas, The distance between the points of

perpendicular photon and its source -for the time Ti- is a positive value and SR claims that

this distance increases with the speed ‘ c ’. That is, actually SR mentality contradicts in itself

by perpendicular photon. This photon never be simultaneously placed at the point P’ and at

the point P1 (figure 2). SR’s analysis based on + x direction and cartesian coordinates hides

this contradiction (polar coordinates better represent the natural reality).

Conclusion

GR contravenes SR; even SR contradicts in itself. The perpendicular oriented photon

collapses the theories SR and GR.

Karl Popper says, “If a hypothesis analysed with x number of factors gives some signals of

incompatibility, it should be re-analysed with x + 1 factors” [4]. SR is built on only two

postulates. Therefore SR and GR have defects. However, light kinematics should be analysed

with at least ten main factors listed above. The new LCS method has been developed thanks

to miscellaneous discussions of SR.

References

[1] Ersan Ö. “Methodological Requirements for Calculating the Age of Universe”

Link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332543051

[2] Ersan Ö. “One Way Speed of Light

Link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342438271

[3] Ersan Ö., Ersan I, Physics Essays, 2013, 26, 1 (Doi:10.4006/0836-1398-26.1.49)

[4] Popper Karl, The Logic of Scientific Discovery

Link: http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/The_Logic_of_Scientific_Discovery