Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

New theory of relativity explains quantum and ordinary physics by same rules - fascinating

Expand Messages
  • Sheila
    Easy to read and understand. Check it out and please comment. Selwyn Wright s New Theory Extension to Einstein s Relativity has Important Consequences
    Message 1 of 2 , Jul 14, 2014
    • 0 Attachment
      Easy to read and understand.  Check it out and please comment.

      Selwyn Wright's New Theory Extension to Einstein’s Relativity has Important Consequences

      Mon, 2014-07-14 22:46 — Sheila Newman
      Einstein’s ether-less relativity, which predicts time travel, is found to be in error (non causal). He believed there was no need of an ether – a propagation medium or substance required to propagate light waves, (similar to water waves requiring water in order to propagate). But an ether-less universe is not possible, it is in direct conflict with the light propagation medium established by Maxwell in 1865. Later Schwarzschild in 1916 confirmed the propagation presence by predicting the medium's contraction, both time and space, around gravitational bodies (space-time distortion). Thus light is not attracted by gravity, it bends passing through the compressed medium. Further it appears that light and gravity are two forms of the same electric field, using the same propagation medium. Although Einstein claimed there was no medium, he actually used one in his field equations, making his predictions causal. A New Relativity (NR) is described based on a medium that predicts Einstein medium based observations, rejects his ether-less predictions that have never been observed and distinguishes between sources and observers in motion, which Einstein’s ether-less relativity cannot do.




      This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.


    • twayburn@att.net
      What I don t understand is the complete absence of criticism of this work on the internet - even the earlier book for which there is adequate time for dozens
      Message 2 of 2 , Jul 15, 2014
      • 0 Attachment
        What I don't understand is the complete absence of criticism of this work on the internet - even the earlier book for which there is adequate time for dozens of reviews to have been written.  I may not be qualified to review this work; and, if I were, where would I find the weeks or months in which to do the work?  Could it be that it is not being taken at all seriously?  This isn't a joke, is it, Sheila?
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.