Why Einstein's relativity theory is plain wrong

[lamare]

A colleague pointed me to the thunderbolts project, who have some very interesting documentaries on their YouTube channel regarding the Electric Universe:

summary
YouTube - ‪ThunderboltsProject's Channel‬‏

They also have a forum, where I posted this, explaining why Einstein's relativity theory is plain wrong:

Thunderbolts Forum • View topic - General Relativity "slightly" Wrong?

-:-

Hi all,

Since this is my first post on this forum, let me first introduce myself briefly. I hold a masters degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Twente, The Netherlands, and have been interested in alternative science for quite some time, especially regarding free energy technology. I have studied quite a bit of theory on ether physics, like for example Nikola Tesla, Tom Bearden, Konstantin Meyl and Claus Turtur.

I have come to the conclusion that Einstein's general relativity theory is plain wrong. It is essentially based on the erroneous assumption that the electric and magnetic fields are caused by matter (charge carrierrs), while we know from Quantum Mechanics that it's the other way around.

The root of the error can be found in the Maxwell equations in their currently accepted form. These equations are the foundation for our current understanding of the electro-magnetic fields. Maxwell, a mathematician, formulated his theory on electromagnetic phenomena based on the experimental results by Faraday. At some point, he postulated that the fields he was describing mathematically were being caused by so-called charge carriers, matter. The essential mistake with that is that this assumes that the electric and magnetic fields cannot exist on their own, while we now know for decades that is not the case.

Updaet: refinement based on question at TB forum:

I must admit this statement is a bit sloppy. The fields can exist in the medium we used to call the ether. So, I should have said:

The root of the error can be found in the Maxwell equations in their currently accepted form. These equations are the foundation for our current understanding of the electro-magnetic fields. Maxwell, a mathematician, formulated his theory on electromagnetic phenomena based on the experimental results by Faraday. At some point, he postulated that the fields he was describing mathematically were being caused by so-called charge carriers, matter. The essential mistake with that is that this assumes that the electric and magnetic fields cannot exist without being caused by some kind of particle, while we now know for decades that is not the case, because from QM we know that particles and electro-magnetic waves are one and the same thing and are nothing more than alternating/vibrating electric and magnetic fields.

So, essentially the error is that the same fields that cause electromagnetic waves (and thus particles when alternating/vibrating in a certain way) supposedly cannot exist without being caused by some kind of electromagnetic waves (particles). Or, the Maxwell equations say electromagnetism and thus electromagnetic waves are caused by particles while at the same time QM says particles are nothing but electromagnetic waves.

And you simply cannot have it both ways at the same time. Either particles cause the electro-magnetic fields, or the electro-magnec fields cause the particles, but not both.

One of the consequences of this error is that current theory does not accept the existence of longitudinal electric waves trough the vacuum, because .... there are no free charge carriers in the vacuum. Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl went back to Faraday's experiments and formulated a more general version of the Maxwell equations by deriving them directly from Faraday's laws, while at the same time describing matter (from atomic to cosmic level) as vortexes in the ether: http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Mat...or-Maxwell.pdf

In the commutability of electric and magnetic field a duality between the two is expressed, which in the Maxwell formulation is lost, as soon as charge carriers are brought into play. Is thus the Maxwell field the special case of a particle free field? Much evidence points to it, because after all a light ray can run through a particle free vacuum. If however fields can exist without particles, particles without fields however are impossible, then the field should have been there first as the cause for the particles. Then the Faraday description should form the basis, from which all other regularities can be derived.

So, with Meyl's theory we have an alternative set of Maxwell equations which are more general, because they put cause and effect in the correct order.

Now we have that in place, we head over to Dr. Charles Kenneth Thornhill (any relation to the Thornhill from the Thunderbolds project?) : Dr Charles Kenneth Thornhill

Even though Thornhill did not re-derive the Maxwell equations along the lines of Meyl, he comes to the same conclusion, from a mathematical perspective:
http://etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf :

The real space-time of Newtonian mechanics and the ether concept is contrasted with the imaginary space-time of the non-ether concept and relativity. In real space-time (x, y, z, ct) characteristic theory shows that Maxwell’s equations and sound waves in any uniform fluid at rest have identical wave surfaces. Moreover, without charge or current, Maxwell’s equations reduce to the same standard wave equation which governs such sound waves. This is not a general and invariant equation but it becomes so by Galilean transformation to any other reference-frame. So also do Maxwell’s equations which are, likewise, not general but unique to one reference-frame. The mistake of believing that Maxwell’s equations were invariant led to the Lorentz transformation and to relativity; and to the misinterpretation of the differential equation for the wave cone through any point as the quadratic differential form of a Riemannian metric in imaginary space-time (x, y, z, ict). Mathematics is then required to tolerate the same equation being transformed in different ways for different applications. Otherwise, relativity is untenable and recourse must then be made to real space-time, normal Galilean transformation and an ether with Maxwellian statistics and Planck’s energy distribution.

More importantly, he lays bare the core of the matter in the same paper:

It was the mistaken idea, that Maxwell’s equations and the standard wave equation should be invariant, which led, by a mathematical freak, to the Lorentz transform (which demands the non-ether concept and a universally constant wave-speed) and to special relativity.

So, because Maxwell postulated the fields to be caused by matter and the assumption was made that the vacuum is void, even of EM fields, they "fixed" this obvious error by the introduction of the "freak" Lorentz transform, which demands a universally constant velocity, the speed of light.

Now we know the vacuum is not void, but filled with the so-called zero-point energy field (ZPE). We also know that the speed of light is not constant when matter is present, which is why light breaks in a lens, for example. And since we know matter is caused by EM fields and we also know the vacuum is filled with all kinds of EM radiation, how can you possibly maintain that the speed of light is fixed?

And then the idea that space is supposedly curved. Think about that. You have defined an abstact concept yourself mathematically, which you call a "space" which is nothing more nor less than a way to express what is located where. Like locating the point where a treasure is buried "10 steps east, 25 steps south". But let me just quote the great master himself, Nikola Tesla on this:

Tuks DrippingPedia : Tesla Gives View On Power

It might be inferred that I am alluding to the curvature of space supposed to exist according to the teachings of relativity, but nothing could be further from my mind. I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved, is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view.

And of course, Tesla actually measured speeds greater than that of light and shows he had the common sense that seems lost by main stream science today: Tuks DrippingPedia : Tesla No High Speed Limit

Stating that the Einstein theory is erroneous in many respects, Dr. Tesla stated as early as 1900, in his patent 787,412, that the current of his radiopower transmitter passed over the surface of the earth with a speed of 292,830 miles a second. According to the Einstein theory, the highest possible speed is 186,300 miles a second.

Tesla indicated knowledge of speeds several times greater than light, and had apparatus designed to project so-called electrons with a speed equal to twice that of light.

Tesla disagreed with the part of the Einstein theory which states that the mass of an object increases with its speed. The mass of a body is unalterable, contended Dr. Tesla, According to the article, "otherwise energy could be produced from nothing, since the kinetic energy acquired in the fall of a body would be greater than that necessary to lift it at a small velocity."

One final quote from Tesla to sum things up:
Tuks DrippingPedia : Tesla Promises To Transmit Force

He described relativity as "a beggar wrapped in purple whom ignorant people take for a king." In support of his statement he cited a number of experiments he had conducted, he said, as far back as 1896 on the cosmic ray. He has measured cosmic ray velocities from Antarus, he said, which he found to be fifty times greater than the speed of light, thus demolishing, he contended, one of the basic pillars of the structure of relativity, according to which there can be no speed greater than that of light.

[...]

The theory of relativity he described as "a mass of error and deceptive ideas violently opposed to the teachings of great men of science of the past and even to common sense."

"The theory, "he said, "wraps all these errors and fallacies and clothes them in magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king. Its exponents are very brilliant men, but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists. Not a single one of the relativity propositions has been proved."

[Armagdn03]

A colleague pointed me to the thunderbolts project, who have some very interesting documentaries on their YouTube channel regarding the Electric Universe:

summary
YouTube - ‪ThunderboltsProject's Channel‬‏

They also have a forum, where I posted this, explaining why Einstein's relativity theory is plain wrong:

Thunderbolts Forum • View topic - General Relativity "slightly" Wrong?

-:-

Hi all,

Since this is my first post on this forum, let me first introduce myself briefly. I hold a masters degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Twente, The Netherlands, and have been interested in alternative science for quite some time, especially regarding free energy technology. I have studied quite a bit of theory on ether physics, like for example Nikola Tesla, Tom Bearden, Konstantin Meyl and Claus Turtur.

I have come to the conclusion that Einstein's general relativity theory is plain wrong. It is essentially based on the erroneous assumption that the electric and magnetic fields are caused by matter (charge carrierrs), while we know from Quantum Mechanics that it's the other way around.

The root of the error can be found in the Maxwell equations in their currently accepted form. These equations are the foundation for our current understanding of the electro-magnetic fields. Maxwell, a mathematician, formulated his theory on electromagnetic phenomena based on the experimental results by Faraday. At some point, he postulated that the fields he was describing mathematically were being caused by so-called charge carriers, matter. The essential mistake with that is that this assumes that the electric and magnetic fields cannot exist on their own, while we now know for decades that is not the case.

One of the consequences of this error is that current theory does not accept the existence of longitudinal electric waves trough the vacuum, because .... there are no free charge carriers in the vacuum. Prof. Dr.-Ing. Konstantin Meyl went back to Faraday's experiments and formulated a more general version of the Maxwell equations by deriving them directly from Faraday's laws, while at the same time describing matter (from atomic to cosmic level) as vortexes in the ether: http://www.tuks.nl/pdf/Reference_Mat...or-Maxwell.pdf



So, with Meyl's theory we have an alternative set of Maxwell equations which are more general, because they put cause and effect in the correct order.

Now we have that in place, we head over to Dr. Charles Kenneth Thornhill (any relation to the Thornhill from the Thunderbolds project?) : Dr Charles Kenneth Thornhill

Even though Thornhill did not re-derive the Maxwell equations along the lines of Meyl, he comes to the same conclusion, from a mathematical perspective:
http://etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf :



More importantly, he lays bare the core of the matter in the same paper:


So, because Maxwell postulated the fields to be caused by matter and the assumption was made that the vacuum is void, even of EM fields, they "fixed" this obvious error by the introduction of the "freak" Lorentz transform, which demands a universally constant velocity, the speed of light.

Now we know the vacuum is not void, but filled with the so-called zero-point energy field (ZPE). We also know that the speed of light is not constant when matter is present, which is why light breaks in a lens, for example. And since we know matter is caused by EM fields and we also know the vacuum is filled with all kinds of EM radiation, how can you possibly maintain that the speed of light is fixed?

And then the idea that space is supposedly curved. Think about that. You have defined an abstact concept yourself mathematically, which you call a "space" which is nothing more nor less than a way to express what is located where. Like locating the point where a treasure is buried "10 steps east, 25 steps south". But let me just quote the great master himself, Nikola Tesla on this: Nikola Tesla : Pioneer Radio Engineer Gives Views on Power


And of course, Tesla actually measured speeds greater than that of light and shows he had the common sense that seems lost by main stream science today: Nikola Tesla : No High Speed Limit, Says Tesla



One final quote from Tesla to sum things up: Nikola Tesla : Tesla, 79, Promises to Transmit Force

I see this topic get thrown about a lot, but this was a well posed argument with some good information to follow, thank you!

There is an interesting concept brought forth by Einstein, and that was the fundamental observation of the inseparability of space and time, Perhaps the treatment of this concept was poor, but hey, looks like its starting to straighten itself out.

[mikrovolt]

At columbia university there should be an account
of how and why modification to Einstein's theory
were made. Dr. Chein-Shiung Wu would have wriiten down
what happened about the time Lee and Yang were writting
there papers. Need to go to the source.

[Farmhand]

Interveiw link
YouTube - ‪MrSuperpotatotomato's Channel‬‏

Excelent interveiw lamare. It often strikes me that a lot of these guys say similar things. The way he spoke of the atom reminded me of this drawing of Walters. It has curved spikes which are the two parts to the wave. And the zero point in the middle he says is like a wallnut. It fits his desciption perfectly. Oh dear me. Coincidence ?
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1887&sc=photos

And the sun and planet pole reversals.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1291&sc=photos

Diagrams from "The Universal One" by Walter Russell.
More and more it seems these things may infact be true, the key may be in studying the works of These controversial old guys. It is good that people like Maurice are pushing these new ways of looking at things he may have had some inspiration from elsewhere that he does not mention but nevermind, main thing is getting it out there and accepted.

The junction of the electron and the proton = neutron = semiconductor

[SilverToGold]

If you're going to go to the great master Tesla, you better also go over the fact that he did not believe in so called Hertzian waves (ie Electro-Magnetic waves). So that part of your reason as to why Relativity is wrong is not congruent with Tesla. Tesla said those ideas are not with his observations.

Tesla believed that so called EM waves were really longitudinal waves in the ether. They were basically sound waves in the ether. He eventually came to say that transverse Hertzian waves were non-existent. There are no EM waves according to Tesla.

This is where people go wrong when they start buying into the modern concepts of physical reality and try to interpret Tesla through these ideas. Tesla is 180 degrees opposite to the modern ideas.

The more higher "education" you have, the tougher time you're going to have understanding Tesla. You've been too brainwash with misinformation to even begin to grasp the reality Tesla was presenting. So when someone with some degrees starts to say he understands Tesla, I know he probably doesn't even understand enough basics to know he doesn't know what he's talking about. He's been lied to so long that he has a hard time coming out of his mental cage. His mind has been carefully mishandled.

The root of the error can be found in the Maxwell equations in their currently accepted form. These equations are the foundation for our current understanding of the electro-magnetic fields. Maxwell, a mathematician, formulated his theory on electromagnetic phenomena based on the experimental results by Faraday. At some point, he postulated that the fields he was describing mathematically were being caused by so-called charge carriers, matter. The essential mistake with that is that this assumes that the electric and magnetic fields cannot exist on their own, while we now know for decades that is not the case.

[Farmhand]

I think this diagram explains sunspots, not sure though.

https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=32a91...1808&sc=photos

Seems plausable

I'll have to see if there are some more of his interveiws, he makes some sense to me.

Those guys at CERN annoy me. They should have read walters book they could have saved a lot of money.

[SilverToGold]

If any of you guys want to really understand Tesla, you better understand one thing.

TESLA DID NOT BELIEVE IN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES!


Until you can understand this simple fact that goes against most of modern science, you can NOT understand Tesla.

Read his article here that goes over this.

"The True Wireless" by Nikola Tesla

To quote the editor:

In this remarkable and complete story of his discovery of the "True Wireless" and the principles upon which transmission and reception, even in the present day systems, are based, Dr. Nikola Tesla shows us that he is indeed the "Father of the Wireless." To him the Hertz wave theory is a delusion; it looks sound from certain angles, but the facts tend to prove that it is hollow and empty. He convinces us that the real Hertz waves are blotted out after they have traveled but a short distance from the sender. It follows, therefore, that the measured antenna current is no indication of the effect, because only a small part of it is effective at a distance. The limited activity of pure Hertz wave transmission and reception is here clearly explained, besides showing definitely that in spite of themselves, the radio engineers of today are employing the original Tesla tuned oscillatory system. He shows by examples with different forms of aerials that the signals picked up by the instruments must actually be induced by earth currents—not etheric space waves. Tesla also disproves the "Heaviside layer" theory from his personal observations and tests. EDITOR.

This is where people like Bearden get it wrong. Smart guy for sure but too brainwashed by modern "science" to really convey the truth about Tesla.

In the end, Tesla didn't buy into Hertzian waves. When people try to combine EM wave theory with Tesla, they are showing a lack of basic understanding of Tesla.

[Farmhand]

I appologise I didn't link this it is from Monsieur's post in the time travel thread I thought it was relevent here too.

My other links above are related to this.
YouTube - ‪MrSuperpotatotomato's Channel‬‏

Sorry i'll link it in my first post above too. My Bad. The interveiw's a goodie.

[MonsieurM]

If i may venture a little on this:

First of i would like to say that I am a proponent of the Unifying Fractal Theory (or as i call it the Super-Hologram Theory). Based on this theory, and as some of you are well aware in all of my post i try to point that out, I consider that everything that surrounds us is a Fractal/Coil/Capacitor Adaptive Antenna, and all resonate following the Phi or Law of Octave. now read this:

An electrostatic spatial resonance model for coaxial helical structures with applications to the filamentous bacteriophages.

It is found that coaxial helices (as fractal as nature is) with optimally mated symmetries(see definition of fractal:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal) can lock into spatial resonance configurations that maximize their interaction(all the element in the universe). The resonances are represented as vectors in a discrete three-dimensional space[

An electrostatic spatial resonance model for coaxial helical structures with applications to the filamentous bacteriophages.

from http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...llector-7.html

Ah, that would be a good way of discovering the potential energy

To incorporate trees (fractal pattern ), I have wondered for some time about what may be termed pinging, first tree transmits, other tree bounces back the energy, yet increased due to the child on a swing analogy(exponential function ). The switching time (cycle)of the transistor being the time interval that creates the push effect of the swing, rather than an immediate bounce back again. In such a case, the first tree is the sender Tesla tower (roots being Ground and trunk being tower), the receiver tree is resonant with it. Trimming the tree trims the frequency to match the first tree.

If I May put it in other words:

If you want to understand the world as a system then you need to investigate three key components.

Cycles your 3
Fractal patterns your 6
Exponential functions your 9



If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.
— Nikola Tesla:






FYI

Electromagnetic Wave Localization in Photonic Fractals

http://www.jwri.osaka-u.ac.jp/public...scp-takema.pdf

Fractal structures have no periodicity and no translational symmetry like crystal structures.

remember Walter Russell's Law of Crystallization (http://www.energeticforum.com/renewa...-crystals.html)

--------

I do agree with SilverToGold on his statement:

TESLA DID NOT BELIEVE IN ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES!

as long as we don't think as Dr Tesla did, we won't understand how he managed to transfer wireless energy:

FYI: did you know that Sir William Crookes was a mentor to Dr Tesla

see post: http://www.energeticforum.com/145702-post58.html

[MonsieurM]

Tesla saw the world probably the same way, a stack of fractally arranged resonant circuits, and all he needed was to know the right combination of

Cycles and Fractal patterns/Fractal Frequency to trigger the exponential effect...

also:

That from a 2002 article. Unlike so many other promising breakthroughs this is one that has been widely implemented.
To further quote from the article: "The innovation, called Fractal Structure Circuit(TM) (FSC), uses fractalized conductor paths to replace the capacitors, inductors, and resistors in "RLC" circuits."
And another quote: ""Virtually every electronic device uses coils and capacitors to form RLC circuits. These discrete components are arranged by tried and true rules to get the circuit to perform as needed. What we've done is ask: can a fractal pattern, with its self-capacitance and self-inductance, be used to eliminate components and still get the equivalent RLC circuit? We've found that the answer is yes; and in most uses, especially at microwave frequencies, all components can be replaced by conductive fractal patterns or 3D structures."
And one more blurb from that article: " Looking at the Fractal Structured Circuit(TM) one sees, for example, a beautiful etched copper pattern replacing the usual traces connecting button or canned shaped capacitors and coils (or their SMT counterparts). "
Here is the link to that article.
Fractal Antenna Systems, Inc.
Apparently it is in wide use in cell phones, their antennas and some microwave circuits.
People are making homemade fractal HD antennas using coat hangers as one instance of using a common material.
I think this feature; fractuals should be used in some builds to take advantage of a wideband of frequencies and resonance. Maybe it will be useful in the Muller/Romerouk build.
For those that be interested google fractal circuits and fractal antennas.
I do not have the resources/space/knowledge to do any builds at the moment but I am curious enough to verify if a HD antenna can be made simply using fractals and common materials.
Any way something to consider.
-RG signing off

YouTube - ‪Fractals: frequency, the heart, and cancer‬‏

You cannot invent, you can only discover

see also: http://www.energeticforum.com/psychi...antenna-2.html

[SilverToGold]

That is why the EM theory is pushed so hard. With this false idea of how things work, people are not able to really understand Tesla and what his ideas were on the ether. How can you understand Tesla's patents or words when you don't even know what his understanding about the fundamentals were?

When guys like Meyl and other degreed gentlemen try to explain Tesla using Maxwell's equations, they are showing how little they understand.

If Tesla held that Hertz was wrong and his waves does not exist, he is also saying Maxwell is wrong. How many people do you see trying to talk about Tesla and in the same breath try to tie Maxwell and Hertz into that "understanding"? How can that be when Tesla said EM waves don't exist and that they are just longitudinal waves in the ether?

And Scalar waves? Come one guys, scalar is not a wave. Scalars are a constant in an equation and they do not change in time.

I do agree with SilverToGold of his statement:

as long as we don't think as Dr Tesla did, we won't understand how he managed to transfer wireless energy:

FYI: did you know that Sir William Crookes was a mentor to Dr Tesla

[MonsieurM]

as the saying goes: To understand a man, you've got to walk a mile in his shoes, whether they fit or not.

[Farmhand]

I don't want to get into another argument but at the risk of that I don't think in that artical Tesla says he doesn't believe in Hertz waves at all. Just that his system did not use Hertz waves. And they they have little or nothing to do with his system, not that he didn't beleive that they exsisted, i don't think anyway.

He says this.

"Nothing is more important in the present phase of development of the wireless art than to dispose of the dominating erroneous ideas. With this object I shall advance a few arguments based on my own observations which prove that Hertz waves have little to do with the results obtained even at small distances. "

And in the next paragraph I point to the bolded text. The radiations he mentions here are the Hertz waves.
"

In Fig. 13 a transmitter is shown radiating space waves of considerable frequency. It is generally believed that these waves pass along the earth's surface and thus affect the receivers. I can hardly think of anything more improbable than this "gliding wave" theory and the conception of the "guided wireless" which are contrary to all laws of action and reaction. Why should these disturbances cling to a conductor where they are counteracted by induced currents, when they can propagate in all other directions unimpeded? The fact is that the radiations of the transmitter passing along the earth's surface are soon extinguished, the height of, the inactive zone indicated in the diagram, being some function of the wave length, the bulk of the waves traversing freely the atmosphere. Terrestrial phenomena which I have noted conclusively show that there is no Heaviside layer, or if it exists, it is of no effect. It certainly would be unfortunate if the human race were thus imprisoned and forever without power to reach out into the depths of space.

He was trying to point out that his system because it exibited "Action at a distance" did not utilize Hertz waves because if it did the effective distance would be very short.

I don't see any evidence that Tesla denied the very Exsistance of Tranverse Electromagnetic Waves.

In my opinion A Scalar wave is like a wave of people it does not go up and down just forward. But it is still a wave, in my opinion the term Scalar wave is valid. Don't ask me to explain my reasoning in any more detail than that though. I just see it as a longways push. I don't get hung up on the term wave. But I use it.

Cheers

[SilverToGold]

Tesla was not able to reproduce Hertz original experiment and he pointed out to Hertz that his results were a result of error in Hertz's measurement technique. So Hertz's experiment that "proved" Maxwell's theory never worked as stated.

So where does this leave room for Hertz's proof as valid? It has never been proved by experimentation according to Tesla.

[SilverToGold]

"I considered this so important that in 1892 I went to Bonn, Germany, to confer with Dr. Hertz in regard to my observations. He seemed disappointed to such a degree that I regretted my trip and parted from him sorrowfully. During the succeeding years I made numerous experiments with the same object, but the results were uniformly negative. In 1900, however, after I had evolved a wireless transmitter which enabled me to obtain electro-magnetic activities of many millions of horse-power, I made a last desperate attempt to prove that the disturbances emanating from the oscillator were ether vibrations akin to those of light, but met again with utter failure. For more than eighteen years I have been reading treatises, reports of scientific transactions, and articles on Hertz-wave telegraphy, to keep myself informed, but they have always imprest me like works of fiction."