2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

Wittig, Hans 2005
Die Geltung der Relativitätstheorie (Auszug): e. Untersuchung
ihrer naturwiss. Bedeutung / H. Wittig.
In: Die Relativitätstheorie fällt. Hrsg.: G. Anger, J. P.
Wesley, H. Kaegelmann. Windeck/Sieg 2005, S. 229-
230. - Status: Kritik.. - Quelle: Autopsie.
Wolff, William F. 2004
Modern physics in a Newtonian universe: a posthumous
publication in memory of William F. Wolff [am
29. Aug. 2001 verstorben] / William F. Wolff, Valeria
R. Wolff.
In: Galilean electrodynamics. 15. 2004, Nr. 5, S.
102 u.119-120.
NEWTON. GRAVIT. ATOME. ART. HIS.
Diskutiert im Zusammenhang mit einem historischen
Überblick zum Verhältnis zwischen Newtons Physik
und der modernen Physik mit ART und QT Physik die
Frage der Gravitation zwischen zwei Wasserstoffatomen
(S. 120). "Newton's treatment was based on his assumption
that the force acts radially, along the line that connects
the center of mass of one body to that of the other;
however, the hydrogen atom calculations show that
this is not exactly a radial force. When a correction is
made for this difference, a modified Newtonian treatment
of gravity [24] is obtained. This new treatment
has been found to satisfy the same three tests that Einstein
used to demonstrate the superiority of his general
theory of relativity over the original Newtonian treatment.
Inasmuch as these latest results were obtained
without the use of general relativity, and the structure
of the hydogen atom was determined without the use of
quantum mechanics, these results provide strong evidence
that all of modern physics might best be regrounded
on a Newtonian foundation."
Die Fußnote 24 bezieht sich auf eine im Druck
befindliche Arbeit des Autors: "A modified Newtonian
treatment of gravity", die inzwischen erschienen ist in:
Galilean electrodynamics. 13. 2002, Nr. 3, S. 55-58.
Wong, Bertrand 2010
An aspect of the special theory of relativity / Bertrand
Wong.
In: The General science journal. 2010 =
http://wbabin.net/physics/wong.pdf - 15 S.
Status: Kritik. - Quelle: Autopsie.
Wong, Bertrand 2010
The special theory of relativity: a special view / Bertrand
Wong.
In: The General science journal. 2010 =
http://wbabin.net/physics/wong2.pdf - 24 S.
Status: Kritik. - Quelle: Autopsie.
G. O. Mueller: SRT. Kap. 4-Erg.
332
Wong, Bertrand 2010
The special theory of relativity: further views / Bertrand
Wong.
In: The General science journal. 2010 =
http://wbabin.net/physics/wong3.pdf - 8 S.
SRT. LK. ZD. GLZ. ERK. QT.
S. 7: "However, a close scrutiny of the Special Theory
of Relativity should make one realise that it is a "theory
of illusions". Concepts in the Theory such as simultaneity,
i.e., what events appear simultaneous to one observer
at one inertial frame might not appear simultaneous
to another observer at another inertial frame, length
contraction and time-dilation wherein an observer on
the ground level (stationary frame) and an observer on a
moving vehicle traveling at close to the velocity of
light (moving frame) see one another's rulers and clocks
contract in length and slow down respectively by the
same degree, and, a person on a moving vehicle (moving
frame) regarding himself as stationary and regarding
the person on the ground level (stationary frame) as
mobile, seem to be, honestly speaking, artificial. All
these parties are each right in thinking the way they do,
according to Special Relativity. That is, all of them are
right in their thinking and no one is wrong - there is
more than one reality. The invariance of the velocity of
light might indeed be a true phenomenon but the explanation
of this phenomenon a la the Special Theory of
Relativity seems quite farfetched. Isn't it so? For example,
could we say that the law-abiding citizen is doing
the correct thing by abiding by the law and the person
who breaks the law, e.g., by robbing or murdering, is
also doing the correct thing by breaking the law? Could
we say that the person who describes a red object as red
in colour and the person, perhaps colour-blind, who
describes the red object as green in colour are both
right? Is more than one standard or reality acceptable?
Isn't all this incredible? Special Relativity appears to
"preach" something like that.
The Special Theory of Relativity by postulating
that the velocity of light is invariant due to clocks slowing
down (time dilation) and length contraction (Lorentz
contraction), each at the same rate as the other, evidently
implies that without these two phenomena the velocity
of light would not appear invariant; all this actually
amounts to manipulating data to make the velocity of
light appear invariant. Thus the invariance of the velocity
of light, as is described by the Special Theory of Relativity,
is evidently just an illusion.
We ask an important question: Couldn't the velocity
of light be invariant without involving time dilation
and Lorentz contraction? This invariance would then
be indisputable.
The invariance of the velocity of light might seem
as mysterious, puzzling and inexplicable as "quantum
weirdness"."
Textversion 1.2 - 2012