2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

(1) für das 1. Postulat (RP) die "Äquivalenz" =
Gleichberechtigung aller Inertialsysteme (und damit
Ausschaltung des Äthers): "This first postulate of SR
["Einstein's special relativity (SR)"] makes the Lorentz
transformations reciprocal; i.e., they work equally well
from any inertial frame to any other, then back again;
so it has no meaning to ask which of two identical
clocks in different frames is ticking slower in any absolute
sense."
(2) für das 2. Postulat (C-K) nicht nur die Unabhängigkeit
der Lichtgeschwindigkeit von der Quelle, sondern
auch von dem Bewegungszustand des Beobachters:
"The second postulate of SR makes the speed of
light independent of not only the speed of the source
(which is also true generally for waves in any medium,
including luminiferous ether), but also independent of
the speed of the observer (which is a feature unique to
SR)."
Verweist darauf, daß diese Postulate nie experimentell
bewiesen worden sind: "Today, many physicists
and students of physics have acquired the impression
that these two postulates have been confirmed by observations.
However, that is not the case. In fact, none of
the eleven independent experiments verifying some
aspect of SR [1] is able to verify either postulate."
"Conclusions. - In LR ["Lorentzian relativity (LR)
theory"], one reference frame (the local gravity field) is
preferred; and speed cannot affect time, but only the
rate of ticking of mechanical, electromagnetic, or biological
clocks. However, just as we do not assume that
time has been affected when the temperature rises and
causes a pendulum clock to slow down, LR says that
changes in clock rates are changes in the rates of physical
processes, and do not affect space or time.
So by carrying an on-board GPS clock on the spacecraft,
we are offered a clear choice between models:
Earth time can be what SR infers it is, or it can be what
the GPS clock says it is. In the former case, SR works,
but leads to heavy-duty complexities and fantastic inferences
about the nature of time at remote locations.
Moreover, the proof that nothing can travel faster than
light in forward time stands intact. In the latter case, LR
works with great simplicity and in full accord with our
intuitions about the universality of the instant "now".
And the speed of light is no longer a universal speed
limit because time itself is never affected either by
motion or by gravity.
Aside from these practical difficulties with the use
of SR in the GPS, Einstein's special relativity is also
under challenge in a more serious way from the "speed
of gravity" issue, because the proven existence of
anything propagating faster than light in forward time
(as all experiments indicate is the case for gravity)
would falsify SR outright [6, 7]. So it is entirely possible
that reality is Lorentzian, not Einsteinian, with respect
to the relativity of motion. In that case, physics may
have no speed limit when the driving forces are
gravitational or electrodynamic rather than electromag-
netic in nature. And that may be the most important
thing that the GPS has helped us to appreciate."
Van Flandern, Tom 2003
Lorentz contraction / Tom Van Flandern.
In: Apeiron. 10. 2003, No. 4, Oct., S. 152-158 =
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V10NO4PDF/
V10N4VAN.pdf - 7 S.
Status: Kritik. - Quelle: Autopsie.
Van Flandern, Tom 2006
The speed of gravity: what the experiments say / Tom
Van Flandern. - [USA]: WWW 2006. 15 S.
URL http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/
speed_of_gravity.asp - Erstmals in: Physics letters. A. 250.
1998, S. 1-11.
SRT. ART. GRAVIT. GAVIT-V.
S. 1: "Abstract. - Standard experimental techniques
exist to determine the propagation speed of forces.
When we apply these techniques to gravity, they all
yield propagation speeds too great to measure, substantially
faster than light-speed. This is because gravity,
in contrast to light, has no detectable aberration or
propagation delay for its action, even for cases (such as
binary pulsars) where sources of gravity accelerate
significantly during the light time from source to target.
By contrast, the finite propagation speed of light causes
radiation pressure forces to have a non-radial component
causing orbits to decay (the "Poynting-Robertson effect");
but gravity has no counterpart force proportional
to v/c to first order. General relativity (GR) explains
these features by suggesting that gravitation, unlike
electromagnetic forces, is a pure geometric effect of
curved Space-Time, not a force of nature that propagates.
Gravitational radiation, which surely does propagate at
light-speed but is a fifth order effect in v/c, is too small
to play a role in explaining this difference in behavior
between gravity and ordinary forces of nature. Problems
with the causality principle also exist for GR in
this connection, such as explaining how the external
fields between binary black holes manage to continually
update without benefit of communication with the
masses hidden behind event horizons. These causality
problems would be solved without any change to the
mathematical formalism of GR, but only to its interpretation,
if gravity is once again taken to be a propagating
force of nature in flat Space-Time with the propagation
speed indicated by observational evidence and
experiments: not less than 2x10^10c. Such a change of
perspective requires no change in the assumed character
of gravitational radiation or its light-speed propagation.
Although faster-than-light force propagation speeds do
violate Einstein special relativity (SR), they are in accord
with Lorentzian Relativity, which has never been
experimentally distinguished from SR-at least, not if
favor of SR. Indeed, far from upsetting much of current
Textversion 1.2 - 2012 315
G. O. Mueller: SRT Kap. 4-Erg..