Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Tsolkas or Einstein ?

RELATIVITY
By
Albert Einstein

Here, Einstein is WRONG!!!!!!!

http://www.tsolkas.gr/forums/tga4.jpg


C.A. Tsolkas

Guess what Mr. Tsolkas. I'm back!

This scan from a book is simply an observation of the equivalence principle, I realised that when I was a teenager. what's the big deal? How does that make Einstein wrong???

Wait, don't answer. Your experiment 14 (gyroscope) is still listed on your site, even after I refuted it. You should remove that page before despertely clutching to every straw you can find. Leaving it there, knowing its conclusion is wrong, is dishonest and shows you have no interest in understanding nature or relativity.

An interesting problem!


http://www.tsolkas.gr/forums/tga.EM.jpg


Christos A. Tsolkas

THE “TOWER OF PISA” EXPERIMENT
ON AN ASTEROID

Let us assume that the Tower of Pisa was built on an asteroid with a diameter, e.g. of D = 50 m and that Galileo released from the top of that tower e.g. a cotton wool sphere with a diameter of d1=10 cm and a sphere with a diameter of d2=10 cm, which consists of the material of a neutron star.
In this case, will the two spheres each the surface of the asteroid at the same time, as with the Tower of Pisa experiment that Galileo performed on Earth?

The answer to that question is negative.
In the case of the “asteroid experiment” , according to relation (72), i.e.:

(m1/m2) < (&#965;2/&#965;1) <1 (74)



the sphere made of cotton wool will be the first to reach the surface of the asteroid, followed by the sphere that consists of the material of a neutron star.
In the “asteroid experiment” described above, Galileo&#700;s fallacy and Einstein&#700;s mistake (regarding the “remarkable” property of gravitational fields), as cited in the beginning (in the project summary) and as we will demonstrate next, are completely clear.
Unfortunately, Galileo&#700;s fallacy and Einstein&#700;s mistake led contemporary Physics down the wrong path.

see,
http://www.tsolkas.gr/html/spherical-shell-problem.html

CONCLUSION
Galileo is wrong and the principle of equivalence of GR is WRONG!!!



Christos A. Tsolkas

Hello Christos

I see your gyroscope experiment (14) is still shown on your website even though I refuted it.

Why should anyone bother working through this spherical shell problem knowing that you'll ignore any disproof?

Five Questions:

Question 1: Why isn&#700;t a simple experiment like the Cedarholm – Townes experiment (1959) carried out on a moving vehicle (e.g. train, aircraft, satellite, etc), so that it can be established once and for all whether ether exists in nature?
What is, therefore, the reason for not performing the Cedarholm – Townes experiment on a moving vehicle?

Question 2: Why isn&#700;t experiment 21 (See www.tsolkas.gr) reperfomed, since it is a very simple and low-cost experiment which proves that the Special Theory of Relativity is completely false?
What is, therefore, the reason for not performing experiment 21?

Question 3: Why has experiment - 14 been kept quiet (See www.tsolkas.gr), since it demonstrates theoretically (in a very simple manner and without any cost) that the “principle of equivalence” of the General Theory of Relativity is an utterly erroneous principle of physics?
What is, therefore, the reason for keeping quiet about this very important experiment?

Question 4: Why is the real cause of the advance of Mercury&#700;s perihelion (43&#900;&#900;per century), i.e. the Sun&#700;s revolution around the centre of mass of the Solar system, being kept quiet?
Because this advance (of the planets&#700; perihelia) is not attributed to the curvature of time-space around the Sun as Einstein wrongly maintains (See &#963;&#964;&#959; www.tsolkas.gr).
Why is this very significant point (purposely) suppressed?

Question 5: Why is the spherical shell problem (discussed above) being kept quiet, since it proves in a very simple manner that : 1) the “principle of equivalence” of the General Theory of Relativity is a completely false principle of Physics, and 2) gravitational fields do not have the “remarkable” property of imparting the same acceleration to all bodies (irrespective of the latter&#700;s mass), as Einstein erroneously claims?
What is, therefore, the reason for keeping quiet about the spherical shell problem?

What answers have physics professors given to Questions (1), (2), (3), (4), (5)?
Is there some “expediency” for not providing an answer to the above five questions? After everything discussed in this paper (and on www.tsolkas.gr in general), we come to the following important conclusion:

Conclusion

Modern physics should be rid once and for all of the “pseudo-science” of the Theory of Relativity.
This theory should no longer be taught in universities for the simple reason that it is false and does not reflect natural reality.
If however, the “pseudo-science” of the Theory of Relativity continues to be taught in universities, this will be the biggest shame in the history of Physics.

Lastly, I have a more general question to pose. In closing up.

QUESTION

Could it be that physics is currently controlled and directed by various “Centers” (universities, professors, journals, etc) towards an anti-scientific path that is taking us to a new Middle Ages?

I am posing this question because this inexplicable (and perhaps intentional) silence and non performance of the above-mentioned experiments probably lend truth to it.

I HAVE A QUESTION...

As is well-known, tremendous amounts of money have been spent on the Gravity Probe b experiment, and eventually this experiment failed!
This compels me to ask all these Physics “Centers” the following question:
Why not spend just a small amount of money to carry out two simple experiments, namely:

The Cedarholm – Townes (1959) experiment on a moving vehicle (e.g. train, aircraft, satellite, etc), and
Experiment – 21 (See www.tsolkas.gr), in order to establish once and for all the accuracy or fallacy of the Theory of Relativity.
I repeat, why don&#700;t these Physics “Centers” explain to us the reason for not conducting these two experiments?
Is there some “expediency” behind this, --so that the foundations of contemporary physics won&#700;t utterly shaken?

I believe this is a very rational question.
This is where my paper ends. Time will tell whether I am right or not.


Christos A. Tsolkas

Just to try one more time to inject a little reason into this extremely long thread.

Einstein may be wrong, but it isn't apparent. Ever since Einstein created his theories scientists have been testing them. For over a hundred years for Special Relativity (SR) and for almost a hundred years for General Relativity (GR) people have been testing them. And they always work. Over and over predictions of SR and GR have been tested and the results have always matched the theoretical predictions. The chance that Einstein was wrong gets more remote with every test, and by this time it is extremely remote.

Bill Gill

It hasn't been kept quiet. I mention it every single time you post on here! I already refuted it. Continuing to promote it shows your scientific dishonesty.

If I remember correctly, this thought experiment shows that circular motion is not equivalent to uniform gravity. Nothing interesting there. Everybody already knew that.





Here you are contradicting your own claim:

"The «gyroscope experiment» described above provides theoretical proof, ... that ... the Theory of Relativity is a completely false theory of Physics."

You say you've proved relativity to be false, so of course no experiment can show that it's accurate, according to yourself.

Kalog, I repeat you are wrong...1oo%!!!!

tsolkas

You should welcome specific, detailed criticism like I provided. Few scientists can make progress in a bubble. You need people to bounce things off. Critical responses (right or wrong) are far more useful than blind agreement or smiles and nods.

ABSTRACT

The XT inventions (124 in total) were published online and on www.tsolkas.gr on the 1st of March 2008.
The XT inventions are internationally protected by Intellectual Property Law and their use, in part or in full, by third parties is prohibited without the author’s written consent. Any violation is punishable by law.
In addition, in the event that any natural person, Industry, University, State, etc, is interested in making use, in part or in full, of one or more of the XT inventions, they may (upon written agreement with the author) be granted the intellectual property rights for their use of the inventions in question.
Finally, I hope the XT inventions will be used to maintain peace, improve our quality of life, and protect the environment.

Christos A. Tsolkas
April 12th, 2011


The XT Inventions(Greek Version)

http://www.tsolkas.gr/html/efeyreseis-xt.html

Christos A. Tsolkas

The advance of Mercury’s perihelion

The “inexplicable” advance of Mercury’s perihelion (43&#900;&#900;/century) is not attributed to the curvature of time-space around the Sun, as Einstein erroneously asserts.
The real cause for this phenomenon is the Sun’s revolution around the center of mass of our solar system.

Unfortunately, neither Le Verrier nor any other physicist to this day have taken this fact (i.e. the revolution of the Sun around the center of mass of our solar system) into account.
Thus, this the great error of Le Verrier and of all other physicists, Einstein included.

For more information, see the link “Proof for the advance of Mercury’s perihelion”, and video 02 (in Greek).See, www.tsolkas.gr


REMARK

WHY DON’T RELATIVISTS ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION?

QUESTION

1. Since the revolution of the Sun around the center of mass of the solar system is an unquestionable fact, and
2. Relativists maintain that the General Theory of Relativity is accurate,

THEN:

Why don’t relativits tell us the value of the advance of Mercury’s perihelion which is due to the revolution of the Sun around the center of mass of our solar system?
Why are they unwilling to make these calculations known to us?

ANSWER

If relativists perform these calculations, they will instantly see that the General Theory of Relativity is a totally false theory of physics!!!

More specifically, can these calculations be performed and presented to us by those who carried out the Gravity Probe b experiment and are advocates of the General Theory of Relativity?
We are awaiting their reply…

I am glad you revived this whole thread just so I could read this ... I had tears in my eyes rolling around laughing at this.

Is your physics really that bad that you actually think this makes sense and you expect us to buy your story.

Here is the problem for you to get your mind around the nuetron star in this position is in Earths gravity frame you can't devoid that or explain it away it simply is. Thus your calculation is WRONG.

Even under Newtonian if you had a nuetron star and tried to do the calculation it requires you to therefore calculate the centre of mass of all the objects which will be some point inside the earth. Now thats the point all the masses are heading for redo the calc accelerations and time and solve the equations with that point and by magic the two objects will hit the surface together MR genius.

GR encapsulates Newtonian physics as a superset but you don't even need it to solve that problem you can solve and show Tsolkas error even under Newtonian physics.

Under special realtivity there is a very very miniscule difference technically the nuetron star will hit first by infinitesimal amount because of SR timeshift based on acceleration. The nuetron star has massive acceleration compared to the light object it has to so as to get get such a heavy mass to the centre of mass at the same time.

Take you pick of the answer they are all roughly the same as distinct from your answer which is so wrong as to be hillarious.

Edit: There is some really cool things you can do with three body newtonian have a look at this site (http://faculty.ifmo.ru/butikov/Projects/Collection.html)
I really really like this one (http://faculty.ifmo.ru/butikov/Projects/Collection6.html) which is near enough to our posters situation :-)

1) Orac , you are WRONG again!!!!!!!!!!!!

*********************************************************

2)A very interesting article.......!!!!!See:


http://www.tsolkas.gr/html/conlusions-electrogravity.html



Christos A. Tsolkas

Put the calculation down and I will correct your mistakes for you.

Sorry just saying I am wrong won't cut it I can prove I am right mathematically and experimentally.

All you can do is squeal I am wrong!

Edit: LMAO I just read your website ... best laugh I have had for a while. So basically no scientist observed stuff correctly and even though almost every school kid does half these experiments there eyes are lying and they should believe you :-)

Edit: Can I ask why you believe in electrons and protons, hell we have lied to you about everything else .... Classic stuff.

Edit: Sorry I am used to school kids trying to solve the nuetron star and small ball bearing as a two body problem not a three body and the error it leads in to. I was not considering you were dillussional to which I will never be able to proove.