Frequently Asked Questions
- Tests Invalidating Relativity
Question - (2-A)
Why should we believe that
Einstein's theory of relativity is wrong?
- Because several experiments have shown very clearly that the results
are not compatible with Einstein's predictions of general
One can also think of other important reasons, (like the
non-conservation of momentum and mass-energy in general relativity [Ref.]) but this has been
discussed elsewhere (see Einstein's
Theory of Relativity versus Classical Mechanics).
Question - (2-B)
Can you give an example of
an experiment giving results which are contrary to Einstein's
- Yes. One of the most simple and remarkable experiment showing that
Nature is not compatible with Einstein's hypothesis is the one
described by Sagnac in 1914. (Ref. Sagnac M. G., J. de Phys.,
1914, 4, 177-195).
Question - (2-C)
Can you give a simple
description of the Sagnac's Experiment?
Here is a simple description.
you have a source of light (a laser) at a certain
location on Earth (e.g. your home). You project that beam of light
directly toward a satellite in orbit around the Earth on which there is
a reflecting mirror. After that first reflection, light reaches other
mirrors in space so that it can finally complete a full turn around the
Earth and reach again the same spot on Earth where light has been
can measure the time it takes for light to
make a complete turn around the Earth when light moves from West to
East. Now, if you repeat the same experiment, with the same mirrors,
(or even do it simultaneously), using light moving from East to West,
you find that the time taken by light to move from East to West is
shorter than the time taken for light to complete the revolution in the
opposite direction. That difference of time is observed with the same
apparatus, making simultaneous measurements, at the same location. One
can show that this difference is due to the Classical Newtonian motion
of Earth rotation. That difference of time for light taken between each
direction depends directly on the velocity of the Earth moving around
there is no possible way to detect the
ABSOLUTE velocity of the Earth. The very use of the expression
RELATIVITY comes from Einstein's hypothesis that parameters, like
VELOCITY, are relative so that any absolute motion (like absolute
velocity) is meaningless. However, we see above, that the velocity of
Earth is responsible for the change of time light takes to go around
the Earth. From a fixed location on Earth, we can detect the Earth's
motion. Therefore, contrary to Einstein principle of relativity, the
velocity of light is not relative to the observer. One must conclude
that the Sagnac effect contradicts Einstein's hypothesis of General
in practice, the Sagnac effect is observed quite
easily. In order to observe that effect, you do not have to make a full
circle around the Earth. If you make light rotate around a diameter of
only one meter and many rotations, (in either directions) you will
observe the same effect. The slight change of time interval to travel
in either directions can be detected using interference patterns
between the beams moving simultaneously in opposite directions. This
method is very sensitive to detect a very small rate of rotation. Such
an observation is very important in ships (or spaceships) and in
airplanes. It is a kind of optical gyroscope (laser gyroscope)
manufactured commercially in large number. This optical gyroscope
detects the absolute velocity of the rotating Earth from any location
on Earth, even if Einstein's theory claims that light travels with
respect to the observer.
a Straight-Line-Component Sagnac effect. (see Einstein's Theory of Relativity
versus Classical Mechanics, chapter 9).
This will not be developed here. The Sagnac effect has been discussed
in many papers. Recently, A. Kelly (The Sagnac Effect and GPS
Synchronization of Clock-Stations) presented a paper at the meeting of
"Galileo Back in Italy", Bologna May 1999. Ref. A. G. Kelly, HDS Energy
Limited Celbridge, Co, Kildare, Ireland. The Sagnac effect on the GPS
Clock synchronization is extremely important.
you can possess now your own instrument that
measures the ABSOLUTE velocity of rotation of the Earth, which is in
striking contradiction with Einstein's Theory of Relativity, while most
of the scientists still refuse to accept that this can actually work.
This is the most striking proof
that Einstein's Theory of General Relativity is wrong.
Question - (2-D)
the Sagnac experiment was known in 1914 (even before the development of
general relativity), how can Einstein's general relativity be accepted
so readily around 1919?
same reason that in Galileo's time, when people refused to
accept that it was not the Sun (nor the sky) which is moving around the
interpretation of the bible was that
EVERYTHING in the sky was moving around the Earth. However, a contrary
observation was already definitely observed using Galileo's first
telescope (when observing the satellites of Jupiter moving around
Jupiter). It is reported that the monks even refused to look through
the Galileo's telescope. Modern physics is dogmatic and possesses many
characteristics of a religion.
Question - (2-E)
How accurate are the
measurements of the Sagnac effect?
experiment has been measured a large number of times
during the last century. In the case of an experiment of radio waves
moving around the Earth, Michelson and Gale (Ref. Michelson A. and
Gale H. Astroph. J. 1925, 61, 137-145)
made the first observation that the electromagnetic signals around the
world took a different time in the East and West directions in 1925.
Very recently, using a ring laser, Bilger H. R. et al. (IEEE Trans. 44,
No:2, p. 468-470) confirmed that the Sagnac effect to better than one
part in 1020.
Question - (2-F)
Since the measured
velocity of light is different in the Sagnac experiment, what is that
velocity of light?
A. - Let us consider the Earth
equator as a rotating disk. Let "R" the radius of the disk and "w
" the angular velocity of rotation of the disk (Earth equator). The
velocity V of the observer (with his clock and his measuring meter) at
distance R from the center is:
Elements of the Problem.
We have seen in the book: "Einstein's
versus Classical Mechanics
that due to the velocity of the observer's frame, and as a consequence
of the principle of mass-energy conservation, the unit of length
changes (see equation 3.23)
in the same proportion as the local clock rate (equation 3.10).
Consequently, the velocity (which is the quotient of these two numbers)
measured by the moving observer is represented by exactly the same
number of local meters per local second. The measured velocity is the
same whether we use rest units Vrest or moving units Vmov.
centrifugal force at the location where the experiment
is done. However, since the radius R of the disk is considered
constant, and a "force" alone is not "energy", the radial acceleration
(gravitational or centrifugal) without displacement is irrelevant.
There is no change of energy due to the centrifugal or gravitational
force alone. Any change of energy (which is the only thing relevant
here) is due to the increase of tangential velocity.
velocity of the rotating disk, the matter at the outer part
of the disk should be dilated as calculated by equation 3.23 This
means that the local Bohr radius (of atoms) is larger, due to the
kinetic energy. However, since the radius of the disk R is constant,
the geometrical perimeter 2pR is also
constant. Consequently, the natural expansion of matter due to the
increase of Bohr radius will produce a force of compression on the
atoms of the disk at the radius R. This phenomenon is similar to what
happens when we squeeze matter. The inter atomic distance is reduced
due to the pressure, as calculated in classical mechanics with the
Young modulus. Of course, "space contraction", claimed in many papers,
does not make sense.
Light for the Moving Observer on a Rotating Disk.
Let us now calculate the time taken by light to complete a
full circle around the rotating disk. When the disk is stationary,
light makes a full rotation around the disk after a time interval "t"
the velocity of light when the observer is at rest, and Rrest is the radius measured at rest.
time interval when both light and the observer's
velocity make an anti clockwise rotation. Since "light" and the
"observer" travel in the same direction, an observer at rest
finds that "light" must travel a little more than a full circumference
in order to reach again the observer who moved while light completes
the circle. That observer (at rest) observes that the relative
velocity between "light" and the moving observer is (c-V). Since the
circumference is 2pR, the time interval "trest" taken by light between two passages in the same
neighborhood of the moving observer is:
is also making the same measurement. He uses the
moving observer's local clock giving tmov and the moving standard meter units to measure Rmov.
above (and also in
the book) that between frames, the clock rate changes in the same
proportion as the units of length. Furthermore we have seen (equation 2 above), that all
measurements of the velocity are the same in any frame. Consequently,
equation 4 becomes:
the "change" of time interval (tmov) as a function of the velocity of the rotating disk. When
the velocity V of the rotating disk changes from zero to ¶V, the difference of time interval is given
by the derivative, which is:
below will always be from the moving frame, we
will now simplify the notation without writing the sub index (mov). The
disk (Earth equator) has an area "A" equal to:
that the velocity V is very small with respect to
the velocity of light, we see in equation 6 that V2 and cV is negligible with respect to c2. Using ¶t equals Dt, for a change of angular velocity w (with respect to an initial value w=0), equations 7 and 8 in 6 give:
the difference of time interval Dt,
taken by light to complete a full rotation around the disk due to the
change "¶w " of angular velocity from
zero to w.
identical to Sagnac equation (Sagnac M. G.
J. de Physics., 1914, 4,
177-195). Sagnac equation gives a double amount as expected, because it
represents by definition, the difference of time interval between two
beams traveling simultaneously in opposite directions, corresponding to
a change of angular velocity from -w to +w . It has been clearly measured and demonstrated
(see question 2-E above), that the
Sagnac equation is in perfect agreement with observations. More
discussion is given below.
determine the "measured " velocity of light
(called "v") as found experimentally by
the moving observer, we compare the time taken by light to complete a
rotation around the disk (at velocity c) with the difference of time
interval given by equation 9. The circumference is:
To taken to complete a rotation when the disk does
not rotate is:
The time Tv taken when
the disk rotates at velocity V (in the same direction as light) using
equation 9 is:
measured velocity of light "v" as seen by the moving
observer is then:
13 in 14 give:
e <<1, equation 15 gives:
7 in 17, we find:
that the measured
velocity of light "v" for an observer moving at velocity "V" is equal
to the difference (or the sum) of the velocities "c-V" (taking into
account the direction of V).
in perfect agreement with the Sagnac experiments, but
also agrees with the results expected from an absolute frame of
reference, in which light is traveling at velocity c with respect to a
fixed frame at rest. Equation 18 shows that for a circular
the measured velocity of light is not "c" but "v", in
the frame of reference used by the observer moving with the disk. The
velocity of light v is equal to (c-V) or (c+V) depending on the
relative direction of V with respect to c, as expected "logically" in
classical mechanics. This is the result obtained when light is not
reflected back toward the initial direction.
Compatibility with the Measurement of a Reflected Beam of Light.
light is measured after being reflected back on a
single line toward the original location, (as measured most of the
time), we have seen that
the velocity of light appears constant (equal to c) to
any moving observer. It is erroneously believed(see chapter nine) that
this result is not compatible
with classical mechanics in which the predicted velocity of a wave
depends on the relative velocity of the observer with respect to the
medium (according to the relationship c-V or c+V).
As demonstrated previously, the measured
velocity of light between frame is also compatible with the existence
of an absolute frame of reference with an absolute velocity of light c
in a fixed frame. This is because the clock rate and the standard
meter are naturally but automatically modified (due to mass-energy
conservation) to compensate for the velocity of the frame. This
agreement is fully understood after considering the clock
synchronization explained in chapter
book: Einstein's Theory of Relativity versus Classical
measurement is, we have seen that all results
are compatible with a constant velocity of light moving in an absolute
The measured velocity of light is compatible with a fixed frame of
reference, either using the circular trajectory of light as done using
the Sagnac experiment or using the velocity of light after reflection
on a mirror.
that the physics of the 20th
century has not been able to realize that, due to mass-energy
conservation, the measuring rods and the clock rate of the linearly
moving observers change in such a way that the velocity of light
becomes independent of the proper velocity V of a linearly moving
observer. However, this natural compensation does not exist in
case of a circular motion of light as shown above, but the result is
still compatible with the same constant velocity with respect to an absolute
The scientists have been brainwashed to such a
degree that they even reject the argument without reading the papers just
notice that all these results have been confirmed
experimentally. In the case of circular trajectories Sagnac
G. J. de Physics., 1914, 4, 177-195) has shown how the
velocity of light varies with the observer's velocity. Sagnac
has been verified experimentally in numerous circumstances. It is the
principle involved in the optical gyroscopes. This is explained above
in question 2-E.
Furthermore, Sagnac equation is equally needed in the mathematical
relationships that gives the exact international time GPS (Global
Positioning System) using orbiting atomic clocks in satellites. The GPS
system needs the "Sagnac correction" in their computer program to
calculate the exact GPS time.
absolute velocity of light "c" with respect to a
fixed frame in space is an experimental fact. The results are
compatible with all known experiments. More general information
given in the book; "Einstein's Theory of Relativity versus
Question - (2-G)
proposed the hypothesis that the force of acceleration G due to gravity
is identical to the force due to inertia (when the velocity of a mass
is changed). According to Einstein, these two forces are
indistinguishable. Are there experiments showing that this is wrong?
experiments show that those two forces have a
different nature, because they lead to different results. The force of
gravity can be applied during a long time without requiring energy.
However, the acceleration involving a change of velocity requires
energy. It is well known that they lead to quite different consequences
that can be verified experimentally.
Question - (2-H)
you give an example showing that the force of acceleration due to
Gravity leads to consequences which are different from the acceleration
due to a real change of velocity of a mass ?
us compare the consequences of Inertial and Gravitational
on the surface of the Earth. After one year,
the mass submitted to gravitational acceleration is always standing
there, without changing its energy or velocity. Let us also consider
another identical mass, submitted to an inertial acceleration of one G
in outer space due to the push of a rocket. After one year, the
enormous energy given to the mass is such that its velocity has reached
an important fraction of the velocity of light. If that mass falls on
Earth its energy produces a gigantic crater on the impact. Einstein's
theory claims that these two phenomena are equivalent and
indistinguishable. This is non-sense. Any scientist should be able to
see the difference. In order to convince people, Einstein adds that
there is no difference for the observer located in the moving mass'
frame of reference.
Einstein's argument, let us consider another
case in which relative motion is observed. A well known example is when
we observe the Sun and the stars crossing the sky everyday, (or the
sunrise or the sunset). Relative to the Earth surface, the sky is
moving around us and the Sun disappears below the horizon. However, we
all know that Galileo, using astronomical data, observed that in fact,
it is the Earth that rotates and not the Sun (and the sky). Using
external astronomical information, Galileo found the correct motion of
the Earth, which led him to correct our understanding of the motion of
planets in the solar system. The simple observation of the relative
motion of the Sun and stars around us, which previously led to the
pre-Galilean naive claim of the motion of the sky around us, was very
poor science. GOOD SCIENCE TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL POSSIBLE OBSERVATIONS
AVAILABLE. It is very bad science to ignore voluntarily some of the
the inertial acceleration of the mass during one year,
it is bad science to ignore the fact that the mass submitted to an
inertial acceleration needs energy for that acceleration and will
restore later the energy acquired. The mass accelerated by the rocket
has acquired energy and an increase of "mass equivalent" (m=E/c2) mass cannot logically be ignored.
the Einstein's principle of equivalence between
inertial and gravitational acceleration leads to a catastrophic
physical incoherence between inertial systems. Einstein's equivalence
principle between inertial and gravitational forces is not compatible
with coherent observations. This principle of equivalence between
inertial and gravitational mass is bad science belonging to
New Choice of Questions
Previous Series of Questions
Go to: Next
Series of Questions
Return to list of
Return to list