Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

Just consider that one man is at location (x,y)  is pulling Box on friction less platform with rope with force F whose component in x-direction & y-direction are Fx & Fy respe.

Calculation of relativity math in Post 4 suggest that actual force acting on Box is more i.e. Fx+Fmy & Fy+Fmx.

Due to more force , more work done happen.

So, less consumption of energy create more work or more energy in relativity.

This is against consistency of energy in that frame.

Edited by maheshkhati
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just consider that one man is at location (x,y)  is pulling Box on friction less platform with rope with force F whose component in x-direction & y-direction are Fx & Fy respe.

Calculation of relativity math in Post 4 suggest that actual force acting on Box is more i.e. Fx+Fmy & Fy+Fmx.

Due to more force , more work done happen.

So, less consumption of energy create more work or more energy in relativity.

This is against consistency of energy in that frame.

You don't appear to understand the physics correctly. Relativity requires more force in the x direction since it increases momentum.

Edited by devin553344
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, you understand something. You are true. Relativity requires more force in the x direction since it increases momentum but mathematics in post 4 proves that

the additional force is not the applied force but mathematical force. & That additional force is not responsible for acceleration in that direction. 

That is the problem.

OR mathematics in post 4 proves that more rate of change of moment happen than applied force in that direction due to combination of velocity in that direction & acceleration perpendicular to that direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Mathematics in post 4 indicate that

step 1 proves that when applied force in x-direction is 0 then force acting in x-direction  Fx= 0+y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STEP 2 proves that applied force in x-direction is -Fx = -y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay  then  force acting in x-direction  Fx= -y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay +y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay =0

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This proves that applied force in x-direction is Fx  then  force acting in x-direction  (Fx+y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This proves that acting force or (rate of change of momentum in x-direction happen) is more than applied force in relativity.

 

Same mathematics indicate by transformation of forces in relativity.

 

Same mathematics indicate that direction of acting force & acceleration are different in relativity.

Even positive direction acting force in x-direction create -ve direction acceleration.

Edited by maheshkhati
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mathematics in post 4 indicate that

step 1 proves that when applied force in x-direction is 0 then force acting in x-direction  Fx= 0+y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STEP 2 proves that applied force in x-direction is -Fx = -y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay  then  force acting in x-direction  Fx= -y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay +y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay =0

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This proves that applied force in x-direction is Fx  then  force acting in x-direction  (Fx+y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This proves that acting force or (rate of change of momentum in x-direction happen) is more than applied force in relativity.

 

Same mathematics indicate by transformation of forces in relativity.

 

Same mathematics indicate that direction of acting force & acceleration are different in relativity.

Even positive direction acting force in x-direction create -ve direction acceleration.

This is ridiculous, if force is more, then as a value it would be greater. Yet you can't supply any examples with values, which makes me think it's fake math.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In relativity force in X-direction is mathematically calculated as

Fx  =d/dt (m ux) = dm/dt . ux + m . du/dt = dm/dt . ux + m . ax

Let, consider fighter plane with horizontal velocity ux drop the bomb B 

& Observer is on ground

For observer :- Bomb B will move with constant horizontal velocity ux & accelerate vertically due to gravity.

So, Force applied on Bomb is gravity only in vertical direction.

but one mathematical acting force is created in horizontal direction i.e. Fx= dm/dt .ux + m. (0) =dm/dt .ux 

as mass of Bomb increases due to vertical acceleration.

So, applied force is different that acting force in relativity.

& even horizontal acceleration is zero there is acting horizontal force

I am giving detail mathematics below

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FORCES IN SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY MAKE SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY WRONG

 

(Special theory of relativity is very great & close theory. If we prove one thing in this theory is mathematically wrong then whole theory gets collapsed because all mathematics of  the total theory are interlinked. So, If we prove acting force is different than applied force or energy consumed is different than energy produce then whole special theory get collapsed because same mathematics can be used to prove transformation equation of  forces for relativity , same mathematics can be extended & can be used to prove dE= y . dE or dM= y. dMo. etc)   

 

CALCULATION 1:- Force without acceleration, acceleration without force & applied force is less than acting force in SPECIAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY.

 

STEP 1:-This problem can easily be understood by following paradox.

{Before starting this paradox, I want to put one relativity formula’s given in standard book of relativity for example “Page no. 135 of Elements of special relativity” by Dr T.M. Karade, Dr K S Adhav & Dr Maya S Bendre.

In any frame, for force in X-direction by S.R.

      Fx = d/dt( y.  mo. ux)  where y=(1-u2/c2)-0.5

   So, after differentiation

Fx= y. mo. (dux/dt) + y3. mo. {ux/c2}. (u . du/dt)  

 Fx= y. mo. ax + y3. mo. {ux/c2}. (u . a)  -----(A)

We know,  u2=ux2+uy2+uz2    

So, after differentiation

       2 u. (du/dt) = 2.ux (dux/dt) +2.uy (duy/dt) + 2.uz (duz/dt)

      2 u. a = 2.ux ax +2.uy ay + 2.uz az    

       u. a = ux ax + uy ay + uz az    --------(   :cool:

from (A) & (   :cool:

So, Fx=y. mo. ax+y3 mo. (ux/c2} (ux ax+uy ay+uz az) ------(1)}

Now, Consider Paradox:-

On frictionless platform, object is moving with constant velocity ux in X-direction & only magnetic force is acting in Y-direction & there is acceleration in Y-direction only with velocity uy & Fz=0

If we apply eq(1) to this case then result will be

       Fx= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay    ----------   as ax=0  

  Or  Fx=Fay  as this force is form due to ‘ay’ only

Mean’s even there is no magnetic force acting on object from outside in x-direction & no ‘ax’ then also above force will act on object in +ve direction of x-axis due to ‘ay’

Important point (1):-

Mean’s applied magnetic force on object in X-direction is 0 & acting force in X-direction is   Fx= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay+0 or Fay+0=Fay

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

STEP 2:-Now, Force acting in X-direction is  Fx= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay or Fay

Now, after this happen, very small magnetic force of same intensity

 -fx = -y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay or  -Fay  start acting on object in direction opposite to above force (but velocity is still positive ux) & cancel that above force.

Mean’s equation (1) becomes

  0=y. mo. ax+y3 mo. (ux/c2} (ux ax+uy ay) 

Or  0 =y. mo ax. (1+ y2  {ux2/c2} ) +Fay 

(Here as  Fay= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay)

Mean’s  Fay = y. mo. -ax. (1+ y2. {ux2/c2} )

Mean’s there must be acceleration in –ve X-direction to fulfill above equation of S.R.

Now, see above equation carefully, it is of nature

     0= -fx + Fay

Important point (2):- Mean’s applied magnetic force on object in X-direction is -fx & acting force in X-direction is  -fx + Fay = 0  or 0.

Here, resultant force in X-direction is zero but there is acceleration in –ve direction.

 

STEP3:- same things happen for +ve force in X-direction (for less than Fay or more)

Now, I am generalizing above result.

Step 1 & 2 clearly shows that when we apply any magnetic force (Fmx) in X-direction on the object, actual force acting on object is more & that quantity is (Fmx+Fay)

Similarly,

If we apply any magnetic force (Fmy) in Y-direction on the object then actual force acting on object is more & that quantity is (Fmy+Fax)

This is completely complicated results, which says that applied force & acting forces on objects are different & more in S.R.

STEP4:- Force does work, consume energy, gain energy & we must know that energy cannot be created. It can be transferred only:-

From above setup it must be clear that energy get transfer from magnet to object but if applied force is less than acting force then energy gain by the object will be more than energy loose by the magnet. Means due to more work done by more force for same displacement, more energy get generated.

HERE, more energy (& force) is the problem.

Where this additional energy (or force) does comes from?

There is no answer in S.R. for this problem.

 

THIS MATHEMATICS PROVES THAT THE S.R. IS COMPLETELY WRONG:-

In S.R., force is not related to change in the state of motion or acceleration as Newton consider but with change in moment.

So, even I move towards falling ball,

fx= y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay  --------  this force will act on the ball.

&  Direction of applied force is different than acting force.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If this mathematics is true then if old man pulls the cart on horizontal platform with force f and fx, fy are their components in X & Y direction respectively

Then above calculation says that actual forces acting on the cart are not fx, fy but

Fx=fx+ y3 mo. (ux/c2} uy ay = fx +Fmay

 & Fy=fy+ y3 mo. (uy/c2} ux ax = fy +Fmax

This will create further problem because if F is actual force acting on the cart then

F2= Fx2+Fy2

F=(fx2+fy2+Fmax2+Fmay2+2 .fx. Fmay + 2 .fy. Fmax)0.5

F=(f2+Fma2 +2 .fx. Fmay + 2 .fy. Fmax)0.5

So, here actual force acting cannot be equated to the sum of resultant force applied by old man i.e. f & resultant of additional force created by Fmay & Fmax.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Above  mathematics proves that

  1. Acting force is different than applied force.
  2. Energy consumed is less than energy produce

Proof:-

Applied force  <  acting force.

So, in this inertial frame

So,  (Applied force X displacement) < (acting force X displacement).

So,  Energy consumed <  energy produce.

This is against  the  law of consistency of energy.

  1. Above mathematics proves that even there is zero ‘Fx’  force acting on object then also body will accelerate in –ve x-direction.

Mathematics of step 2 proves that for applied force 0 to –fx,

Acting force direction is +ve & acceleration direction is -ve

  1. If above calculation is proved wrong then

a)Trnsformation equation of forces in special relativity is wrong.

As same mathematics if extended gives transformation equation in relativity

For example:-

So, if

F’x = d/dt’( y’.  mo. U’x)  where y’=(1-u’2/c2)-0.5  This equation is wrong then

F’x = Fx – ( v/c2 . Fy. Uy)/(1-V .Ux/c2)   ----transformation equation in relativity is wrong because ..

If this differentiation extended by proper transformation equations of frame like putting equations of  U’x, y’  & d/dt’ then we can prove that

F’x = Fx – ( v/c2 . Fy. Uy)/(1-V .Ux/c2)   ----transformation equation in relativity.

So, if F’x = d/dt’( y’.  mo. U’x)  where y’=(1-u’2/c2)-0.5  is   wrong then above transformation equation for force is wrong.

:cool: dE= y . dEo is wrong

Proof:-

As,  F’x = Fx + ( v/c2 . Fy. Uy)/(1-V .Ux/c2) 

 F’y = (Fy/ y ) /(1-V .Ux/c2)   ----transformation equation in relativity.

Now, consider event

Consider ball is falling under gravity in rail cabin with vertical force Fy  only then by above transformation equation of relativity

 for person on platform.

F’x =(Uy.v/c) . Fy    &      F’y = (Fy/ y ) --------(1)

As Fx =0 & Ux =0

Similarly,

d’y = dy ------(2)

d’x = y (dx + v dt)

As dx =0 in rail cabin frame.

d’x = y v dt  ------(3)

Now, Energy consume in this event by observer on Platform :-

d’w = F’ d’s = F’x.d’x+F’y.d’y

put the values (1), (2) & (3)

d’w = y v dt . (Uy.v/c) . Fy    + dy . (Fy/ y )

d’w = Fy  . {y dt . (Uy.v2/c) + dy / y }

d’w = Fy  .dy . {y.v2/c + 1 / y }

d’w = y. Fy  .dy

In Rail cabin force acting is F=Fy & displacement ds =dy only.

So, d’w= y . dwo

So, d’E = y . dEo

So, if above mathematics & force transformation is wrong then above calculation is also wrong because special theory of relativity is interlinking theory. If we prove one thing is mathematically wrong then whole theory is collapsed.

  1. If dE= y . dEo is wrong then

dE/c2= y . dEo /cis wrong.

So, dM= y . dMo is wrong.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Above mathematics is not wrong & not fake.

Fake mathematics can be easily proved wrong & you have not proved anything wrong in above mathematics. 

Edited by maheshkhati
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://youtu.be/W9yWv5dqSKk

 

This video beautifully explain the particle, wave duality. This also proves that this is only possible when particle (Droplet) moving in some medium then only duality is possible. I consider the space as given in 2nd chapter of my paper https://vixra.org/pdf/2006.0033v1.pdf act as medium through which particle travel. Last chapter explain how electromagnetic vibration happen in particle level.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://youtu.be/W9yWv5dqSKk

 

This video beautifully explain the particle, wave duality. This also proves that this is only possible when particle (Droplet) moving in some medium then only duality is possible. I consider the space as given in 2nd chapter of my paper https://vixra.org/pdf/2006.0033v1.pdf act as medium through which particle travel. Last chapter explain how electromagnetic vibration happen in particle level.

So you're an ether guy without any proof of your idea. Yeah that explains a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am very sure, if Einstein develop general theory of relativity first & then see toward local theory of relativity. He will develop it in my way. Big object  not only bend the space but create the space. Vacuum is different than space. Particle is local vibrating charge spike in a space as given in last chapter OR world is the interaction of big charge with local charges.

Many scientist knows that Einstein special theory of relativity is wrong & they try to prove it wrong by experiment but relativity wins because time & mass are the properties of space. They do not remain same. So, we get effect that time slow down due to motion or require more force for same acceleration after velocity gain. 

But this create other problems like dark matter, dark energy, sudden expansion of universe after big bang,  very large unexplained black holes at early universe, collapse of standard model of particle physics, wave particle duality etc. This all problem cab be solve only by revisiting physics again with new thought. Starting is space & vacuum are different & physic's mathematics is get applicable in space only not in vacuum.

Edited by maheshkhati
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

I am very sure, if Einstein develop general theory of relativity first & then see toward local theory of relativity. He will develop it in my way. Big object  not only bend the space but create the space. Vacuum is different than space. Particle is local vibrating charge spike in a space as given in last chapter OR world is the interaction of big charge with local charges.

Many scientist knows that Einstein special theory of relativity is wrong & they try to prove it wrong by experiment but relativity wins because time & mass are the properties of space. They do not remain same. So, we get effect that time slow down due to motion or require more force for same acceleration after velocity gain. 

But this create other problems like dark matter, dark energy, sudden expansion of universe after big bang,  very large unexplained black holes at early universe, collapse of standard model of particle physics, wave particle duality etc. This all problem cab be solve only by revisiting physics again with new thought. Starting is space & vacuum are different & physic's mathematics is get applicable in space only not in vacuum.

Meanwhile on Planet Earth, smart people have already realised that if Einstein was right, then the following must be true.

 

1/ any equation that includes a velocity, a distance or length, a Mass, or a reference of a Time period, is necessarily NONSENSE, because Einstein claims that these properties are not stable, i.e. they are subjective experiential opinions, and not the  reliable properties that Classical Physics required and assumed. So for example, you cant make up an equation where a distance or length (d or L) appears in the equation, because its not always remaining the same d or L throughout.

And the equations and functions that work correctly for one observer, can't still be applicable to another. Their seconds, meters, kilos and therefore velocities are incomparable. Simply because no one can say who's moving and who's not, maybe both are? who knows? And how fast? but who's meter and second are we going to derive the measurements? But according to Einstein this unknowable situation is essential to know, if one expects to calculate the correct outcome with the equations. Knowing the unknowable is a real trick.

 

2/ Any equation that includes the speed of Light © must be wrong. Simply because this is supposed to represent a CONSTANT, the ONLY actual constant in the universe. Everything else is a "subjectively interpreted property" (Length, Time and Mass)  unique to each observer, like their relationship with Jesus is a subjective experience.   However, Einstein in his theory of Special Relativity, relied on Lights constancy, and without it, there can be no Time Dilation, Mass increase, or Length contraction.   Problem is that in Einsteins Theory of General Relativity, Einstein realised that LIGHT SPEED IS NOT A CONSTANT!

 

If light speed is NOT a constant, then there is no Time Dilation, no Mass increase, no Length Contraction,  no Special Relativity at all.   This being the case, then there is nothing remaining to point to any imaginary issues with the rest of the universe, no need to try to suggest that Gravity is a not a real force.

 

So if you expect to be taken seriously, as a believer in Einsteins theories, you need to stop making up equations that include length, mass and time, and any reference to the constancy of Light, these are all unknowable variables, and any equation that has nothing but unknowable values is worthless. What use is the Newton Physics Equation, V=dt when an observer will claim that nothing has moved, but another will say it has? The external observer will claim that the spaceship is doing some measurable velocity, but the guy inside the ship is claiming that he is motionless, and additionally, there exists nothing outside his ship? 

 

All talk of Big Bang, Dark Matter, Spacetime, space vs nothingness, Black Holes and the like, is just verbal diarrhoea.   

 

More interesting is real Physics.

Edited by marcospolo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...