Einstein’s famous three miraculous results plucked from the blue sky involve a fourth.
The complete list reads:
The new fourth point implies that the speed of light c remains a global constant in the equivalence principle (as axiomatically assumed from the outset).
The added new point (4) remained overlooked for more than a century. Therefore, a re-scaled “global-c version of general relativity” is waiting to be written down.
January 12, 2019
Dear Prof Rossler,
Could you please, for the uninitiated, give a brief explanation of fourth an its possible implications?
I appreciate your question, dear Marcos.
1) The main implication is the rehabilitation of the universal constant c as a global constant also in the presence of gravitation (where previously only a "local" validity of c has been assumed to hold ever since 1907).
This inconsistency forced Einstein to fall silent on the topic of gravitation between 1907 and 1911. Thereafter he could afford leaving this sore point unaddressed since he was no longer an outcast. In general relativity, the inconsistency remained to be inherited, which fact made finding a generally valid theory virtually impossible. The former ingenious kid had to transform himself into an equations-juggler to survive this virtually impossible barrier.
2) After the repair of the inconsistency, the whole job waits to be done once more -- under vastly simplified conditions, however. So one can predict that it will take but months until the new global theory of relativity is found.
3) A hint comes from Fritz Zwicky's work who already described a cosmology with a global c in 1929. The new statistical-mechanics valid for gases of gravitating particles that follows from Zwicky's breakthrough, is based on Yakov Sinai's chaos-theoretic approach of 1970 and is called "Cryodynamics, sister theory to Thermodynamics." It enables interactively controllable fusion reactors. It will form the basis of the planetary energy technology of the future.
4) There is also a drawback, however. Not only cosmology involves non-expansion and an eternal Heraclitean metabolism. Also the properties of black holes are radically altered by c-global. My embarrassing criticism of CERN's blue-eyedness (and even fraud) has its root at this point. This gives me a very bad conscience.
Forgive me for this long-winded answer.
Dear Prof Rossler,
Thank you for your explanation. Again, If you have patience, It would be interesting explaining for the novice the fourth more detailed, and how it has as a consequence c as a global constant.
Thermodynamics is believed to be one of the most if not the most general valid theory of physics. In which aspects does cryodynamics add something new on the traditional postulates of thermodynamics?
Dear Marcos Celio De Almeida ,
Please be aware that what Otto is saying has little to do with Einstein's actual work, he published it many years ago in relation to the LHC but it has been shown to be incorrect by several other authors. The following may be of interest.
https://public-archive.web.cern.ch/public-archive/en/LHC/Safety-en.html
http://environmental-impact.web.cern.ch/environmental-impact/Objects/LHCSafety/NicolaiComment-en.pdf
http://environmental-impact.web.cern.ch/environmental-impact/Objects/LHCSafety/NicolaiFurtherComment-en.pdf
https://www2.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/CommRoesslerPaper.html
ROFL, you are the one advocating the 70 year old "Tired Light" model that was ruled out last century!
ROFL?
You sound as if finding a new science -- Cryodynamics -- was a crime.
On the other hand, it is infinitely more rewarding to face an "enemy" as one's last friend than a whole silent community.
So I really appreciate your help, dear George!
Otto
OER: You sound as if finding a new science -- Cryodynamics -- was a crime.
No, I just find it humorous that you call an idea elucidated by someone else over 70 years ago "new", try to plagiarise his idea by giving it a new name, and are so unscientific that you can't understand that observation ruled it out about 50 years ago.
It is wonderful to have an ardent opponent evading a head-on dialog. This increases the chances of others joining in. Therefore thank you again, dear George.
Otto
You're the one "evading" Goldhaber's paper Otto, I've told you about that a dozen times or more, you just "bury your head in the sand" as the saying goes.
Thank you, James.
The theory of the expanding universe is disproved since 1929, as the new fundamental science of Cryodynamics has proven for almost a decade. It is good for an economic bonanza as no one denies.
Dear George:
The old paper you so insistently point to says nothing but that the cosmological redshift extends to very low frequencies, which is self-evidently correct.
Only that nothing follows from it regarding Zwicky. Right?
It is the first time that eloquent George is speechless -- for almost 5 months...
- Badges
- Science topic