ON INCONSISTENCY OF EINSTEIN SPACE-TIME INTERPRETATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY AND ITS ALTERNATIVE: - THE PRINCIPLE OF RELATIVITY ON POINCARE (END) AND NEW UNIFORM CIRCUIT OF HYPOTHESIS OF MEDIUM - ETHER, INERTIA AND GRAVITATION
R. ZH. Aydarov
The basic idea of "Theory of relativity” (TR) is a ensteinian space-time interpretation of the principle of relativity, proved in the kinematics part of “Special theory of relativity (STR)” in which dependence of properties of extent (“longitudinal reduction”) and duration (“ the slowed down current of time ”) on speed of forward regular moving reference systems (“inertial spaces”) and bodies, as components of the spaces is stated and which had further development in “General theory of relativity (GTR)” in which influence of gravitational effect on “curvature of space” and deceleration of time current in “not inertial reference systems is presented.
Everyone knows that TR is recognized as the greatest achievement of science of XX century and its author Albert Einstein is recognized as the Greatest Thinker of XX century and the 2nd millenium owing to him such basic world outlook concepts as Space, Time, Mass and Energy were revised.
At the same time nobody knows and it is not advertised that the TR has "untouchable" status which result in imposing "Taboo" on any doubts concerning validity of its provisions and consequences and also on promotions of ideas inappropriate to it. Such ideas and works not only "are not published", but even “are not considered as obviously antiscientific” [ 1, 3] . In this connection the climate of intolerance to dissidence around the TR is created, which reminds the period of the medieval Catholic inquisition of dissenters (N. Kopernik, G. Bruno, G. Galiley).
Nobody knows, that tendentiousness in interpretation of unusual sights of predecessors (for example, concepts of "snap-long-range action” I. Newton; “mechanical interpretation of electromagnetic interactions” G. K. Maxwell); concealment of some facts connected to dynamic genesis of Lorentz factor and interrelation of mass and energy, their dependence on speed which appeared before the STR; concealment of contribution of some scientists in the decision of the relativity problem and including A. Poincare take place in official versions of history of the TR formation [ 3, 4] .
There is a few people who knows, that before occurrence of the STR the outstanding French mathematician - physicist - astronomer, engineer and philosopher A. Poincare was the unique scientist who had been studying for 25 years and covering under different points of view the various aspects connected to the problem of relativity; that he was an ideologist of elevating of the relativity principle of mechanics (Galilean principle) in the rank of the general physical principle by which is necessary to be guided to estimate working and new physical theories pari passu with general principles - laws as principles of conservation of mass and energy [ 5, 6] .
There is a few people who knows, that Poincare disapproving of einsteinian interpretation and considering it "deadlock", stated forcible reasons personally to Einstein when they had the only meeting in November - December of 1911 at the 1st Solway congress, but Einstein, having apprehended them as “groundless denying of the TR”, could not oppose something, except for “that Poincare, in spite of sharp mind, had not understand the situation”, meaning that by that moment the TR had been recognized by the leading physicists.* But Poincare, who had not been subject to tactical circumstances, could not accept such reason as an argument. [ 7] Just because Einstein knew not only Poincare's negative attitude to the TR, but also his concrete reasons, it is possible to explain his position in relation to Poincare so he saw threat of his work, and therefore Einstein preferred to avoid discussion of his views. It explains the fact that Poincare's name has been mentioned in his works 3-4 times for 55 years casually. Einstein didn’t respond to the unexpected death of Poincare, which took place on 17.07.1912, though before Poincare had taken part in Einstein's scientific destiny, having given the recommendation on taking on him as a professor to the Zurich Polytechnic School. He also evaded from presentation of article devoted to memory of Poincare to “Acte Mathematice” magazine, in spite of long correspondence with (2,5 years) known mathematician Leffler – Mittaga who prepared this magazine for edition. [ 7] The best, more than once checked Einstein’s method of protection was the method of hushing up which the followers of Einstein effectively used and that led to oblivion of Poincare’s works on problem of relativity.
All above-mentioned explains that everything is not so cloudless, quietly and indisputable in the TR as Einstein's followers would like to present in numerous publications where except for apologia in superlative degree, necessity of acceptance of positions and consequences of the STR on Belief are stated as Einstein's deep and unusual ideas can be “understood only by 10-12 wise men in the world” [ 4,7] . But it is not enough. Therefore “the special status of TR” is established as an emergency measure, which protects prevailing position of the TR, in turn, it reflects internal weakness of the TR, which is afraid of opening contradictions in it. In fact if the theory is strong and its basic ideas are true, the criticism only strengthens it, allowing to reveal and eliminate weak points, keeping and developing its basic ideas. It does not demand excessive praisings, belittlings and distortions of the previous theories, hushing up and burying in oblivion of works owing to the probable content of alternative decisions and wrongful statement of "the special status”, which are incompatible with concept of science, i.e. all that takes place with the TR. There are a lot of other symptoms specifying discrepancy of the TR, demanding its critical reconsiderations.
World outlook of the author of these lines, as well as several generations, has been formed in spirit of worship and recognition of the TR validity and worship of its originator. The TR attracted the author with the singularity causing special interest; it was promoted by reading popular scientific books devoted to the relativity of such outstanding physicists as V.Pauli, M.Born, G.Feinman, D.Bom, J. Willer, L.I. Mandelshtam, etc. Familiarity with these books started before entering institute and continued after graduating from it. Notwithstanding spells about position and consequences of the TR should not state doubt and should be taken as truth, nevertheless I showed imprudence and called “Einstein's first step” in question which was considered its main merit and as obligatory and necessary condition of the STR construction and its understanding, namely its "decisive step" with help of which he together with inconsistent “ether dust” thrown out fruitful idea of medium and accepted “absolute emptiness”.
After long reflections in 1962 - 1963 idea of hypothesis of the ether appeared, which noncontradictory explains, without additional hypotheses, classical optical theories (O. Frenel, A. Fizo, J. Stocks) and results of Mainelson’s test on detection of "ether wind” which according to the calculations of this hypothesis is not more than 18 m/sec, i.e. corresponds the last results of tests (more than 5-30 m/sec.). The idea of a new hypothesis was so attractive and simple, that before it sounding, it was necessary to familiarize in details with history of ether and the theory of relativity. This study confirmed urgency of the ether hypothesis search uncontradictory expressing the medium though it is considered that “all conceivable offers and combinations were exhausted to learn structure of the light ether” [ 8 p. 640] . Einstein proved prematurity of such conclusion who had actually recognized inaccuracy of refusal of the medium during construction of the GTR entering two ethers independent from each other for distribution of electromagnetic waves and for distribution of gravitational waves that led to the contradiction of the concept of "unity of the nature” and between the STR and the GTR. A way out of the created situation Einstein, as it is known, looked for in development of "Theory of uniform field” that he had developed unsuccessfully for 35 years to his death.
In 1985 the article with statement of new hypothesis of the ether - medium with an example of Maikelson’s test was prepared. The article was sent to the all-Union magazine “Science and life” to the department of improbable ideas and hypotheses since the offered hypothesis didn’t not correspond Einstein's theory. As it was expected, edition of the magazine refuse to publish the article motivating that “the hypothesis didn’t not correspond Einstein's theory and confirmed efficiency of “the special status of the TR” and efficiency of the mentioned "Taboo"”.
During profound studying of the TR, except for the question of the medium in the theory considered the greatest achievement of mankind, many contradictions and the doubtful moments was found out and the main thing, on the basis of the analysis of the STR kinematics, transparency of logic of its construction and the inconsistency of the TR’s idea, namely Einstein space-time interpretation of principle of relativity with determination of the concrete reasons and methodical mistakes were revealed. It was shown, that they were not accidentally and reflected full Einstein's gnosiological position and doubtfulness of the preconditions accepted by him in his heuristic idea which during becoming and propagation of the TR were appreciated as “new non-mechanical thinking” opposed to “old mechanical thinking” which included everyone who adhered to idea of the medium. It is necessary to note, that in the literature there is no in general attempt of analysis of the STR kinematics, if its re-statements are not taken into account, which differ from Einsteinian one by abundance of delights and admirations, that prevents intelligent perception of its essence.
Character of gnosiological position of Einstein is that he repeatedly proclaimed the adherence to the concept of independence of the real world, phenomena and its laws, he everywhere identified methods and properties of measurement tools with properties of researched objects with carry over each other; connected cause-and-effect relations therefore the reason became consequence and consequence became the reason; he treated rather free with the accepted concepts, with introduction into them elements of uncertainty that the promotes to give plausible form to the illusory notions using mathematical formalism. Everything makes the real world, forces of its laws and their write-off fully dependent on the subject studying this world, its methods and properties of tools, transforming its statements on independence of the real world into declaration, that is shown in the TR.
The heuristic idea with accepted doubtful and not enough proved preconditions, predetermining setting of the task and its solving with exception of other alternative decisions, is the main in logic of construction and interpretation of results of Einstein kinematics, which doesn’t recognize and reject other logic.
The first precondition of heuristic idea is, according to Einstein's evidence, a paradox, which he reflected when he was 16-year-old young boy that the observer moving together with a ray of light could see. This paradox shows consequence of the STR about delay of time current in its limiting case when movement of the body and its reference system achieves light speed at which time current, ostensibly, stops because the observer cannot find forward movement of light. Realization of this precondition dictates revision of time conception connected its current with reference systems, in each of them time flows differently.
But light representing a complex form of movement where except for progress there is a cross-section oscillatory and rotary movement which the observer continues to fix; it assumes: either current of time does not stop or it flows selectively, stopping in longitudinal direction and continuing to flow in cross-section direction that is difficult to present; and it contradicts provision of the STR about constancy of light speed simultaneously to all inertial reference systems.
At the same time, this precondition causes conceptual questions, namely: if the forward movement being one of forms of various movements and interactions, causes delay of time current then other forms of movement should influence current of time that proves to be true by the consequence of the GTR and influence of gravitational interaction on delay of time current. But then current of time should have functional dependence on each form of movement and their combinations. Thus, it is impossible to prefer any of them to establish real current of time, especially, such form of movement as uniform forward movement. And if it is so the current of time becomes unsteady, dependent on everything, including the observer, that, in turn, prejudices identical force of laws and their identical description, i.e. it does not provide observance of substantive provision of the principle of relativity.
The second precondition is that available asymmetry in electrodynamics of solid as Einstein noted “probably is not inherent in natural phenomena” according to the principle of relativity, but this "asymmetry" which is as real one in hypothesis of Lorentz –Fitzgerald reduction due to interaction of moving bodies with “rest ether”, Einstein said that this hypothesis as the possible explanation of asymmetry, is transformed to the established fact, but interaction with the ether is rejected, and the explanation contacts various current of time and extent in inertial reference systems, i.e. contacts the first precondition. Thus, other explanation is thrown off, for example, “asymmetry is not inherent in the nature”, and it is a seeming one by reason, which is necessary to find. Accordingly, in problem of kinematics the purpose to receive Lorenz reduction as consequence is put, i.e. to confirm reality of reduction of longitudinal extent of space where bodies are components of this space. For this reason it is required to specify concepts of time that is solved by replacement of concept “Lorentz local time” by concept "time".
Such is the einsteinian logic based on heuristic idea, in which preconditions should necessarily become consequence that determines statement of the problem, construction of kinematics and interpretation of kinematics and throws off other possible alternative decisions deliberately, i.e. the kinematics of the STR is a heuristic method which advantage is finding of a short way due to guess - preconditions, allowing to exclude search and check of other alternative decisions. But this advantage can become disadvantage since the guesses-preconditions do not give optimum and correct decisions since they (guesses) can contain erroneous representations, which are automatically transferred to the results and their interpretations, creating illusion of plausibility and non-alternative.
The concept of simultaneity of the events entered by Einstein plays the important role in replacement of “Lorentz local time” by "time", which is explained by the method of synchronization of hours which being guided by property of constancy of light speed independent on movement of light source and light reflecting screen there appeared interrelation of extent and interval of time of passing of light from initial rest point where there is a source and observer and returning of light after reflection. This interval of time divided by 2 expresses interrelation of extent and time through light speed AB+BA=2AB∙C, AB= BA=AB∙C. Fixing hands of several clocks with movement in point A at time tA, and then carrying them to points B, C, D, etc., located on the direct line; in each point the clocks are fixed by manual putting of hands back to corresponding time interval of light passing. At that if we send the ray of light from point A during the moment t0 on reaching specified points, the clocks will show t0 on the points i.e. figuratively speaking simultaneity is on the point of beam edge. On the basis of this relation, Einstein considered this explanation sufficient for replacement “lorentz local time” by "time". At that if the observer moves with any fixed speed V not exceeding light speed on reaching these points, he will find out that clocks at them will be slower than the clocks fixed at time A, for interval of light passing to the given point.
It is necessary to note, that other agreement can be accepted, for example, hands of clocks should be fixed at the point A at time tA, and then carrying clocks to the points B, C, D, etc. putting hands of clocks forward, instead of back, to corresponding intervals of time. Then clocks at these points will be fast in comparison with clocks at the point A to the same interval of time. Introduction of conception of simultaneity with synchronization of the clocks used to explain replacement of "local time” by "time" is a bright illustration of identification of method including his explanation with the object of research resulting in consequence on delay of time current though if we accept other agreement it is possible to come to consequence on acceleration of time current that is reached by compulsory manual putting of hands back or forward illustrating Einstein's gnosiological position mentioned above in general. Mental experiment on which basis the kinematic substantiation of space-time interpretation of principle of relativity is built, is the same method as for the simultaneity concept distinguished by that on the direct line there are points with the clocks serving as control points. If the point - screen moves with preset speed V from the rest observer the prompt-dot light signal (point of beam edge) which after reaching the moving screen and being reflected during the moment corresponding to overlapping with one of the control points with known distance and after reflection comes back to the observer. Thus the interval of time of beam passing forward and back for some reason does not coincide with the interval of time received at reflection from the control point with which combines the moving point.
Einstein considered this discrepancy according to his heuristic idea as demonstration of the asymmetry expressed by the real lorentz reduction caused by difference of time current in moving inertial reference system which has a moving point.
It is necessary to note that only consideration of time of light passing forward and back is caused in kinematics of the STR, in setting of the problem and mental experiment and act of falling and reflection of light is obviously excluded from consideration since this act is accepted as instant one for both rest and moving screen. Acceptance of a point-light signal causes instantaneousness of the act of falling and reflection of light not allowing to find influence of movement of the screen on change of duration, which can be revealed only using the light signal of given duration which change after reflection from the moving screen in comparison with reflection from the rest screen should specify influence of movement of the screen.
Thus, Einstein did not take into account one of the major aspects of principles of relativity during development of kinematics, which Poincare persistently paid attention to, that in nature there are no instant interactions and instant events. Einstein did not consider other Poincare's remark that at measurement we simultaneously investigated and we found properties of measurement tools that causes necessity of account all properties of the tool, which can influence process and result of measurement. This property of light is wave and dynamic characteristic of light changing during falling and reflection of light from the moving screen, i.e. from the measurement tool changing properties of extent and duration during falling and reflection of light.
It is interesting, that Einstein concluding transformation of Lorentz used method of superposition of coordinates to move further moving system of coordinates to infinitesimal õ1and intervals of time to simplify system of equations and he didn’t notice that he had excluded inertial spaces where distances were overcome by light with constant speed , thus he in solving of system of the equation had limited the near screen area in which there was falling and reflection of light, i.e., by twist of fate he had considered that very area and that interval of time which were changed due to movement of the screen; but he considering this act of falling and reflection instant, the received changing required value in the equation, had attributed it to property of space of time of moving reference system.
The made direct deriving of relativized formulas of Doppler effect, considering its falling and reflection, confirms that its formation is made during falling and reflection on the screen, during it the space and a solid are not deformed but the tool of measurement - a ray of light that accordingly, results in inconsistency of lorentz –fitzgerald hypotheses and illegitimacy of its acceptance by Einstein in the precondition and consequence as an established fact and interpretation of Lorentz factor as scale factor, which for a moving body is the factor of relativistic formulas of Doppler effect :
Where - length of an initial ray of light and length of the stem at rest.
At the same time, his interpretation as invariant factor of transformation of the coordinate system providing identical expression of the mechanics equations describing movement of material bodies and material points, which possess physical properties (weight, charge), remains constant both with Poincare and with Einstein.
It would seem, that the specified analysis of kinematics and new hypothesis of the medium of ether are sufficient to have a question on revision of the basic idea of the STR as the alternative decision is simultaneously offered.
However in 1986 I bought and studied "Selected works” of Poincare and the collected articles which included 4 his books on science and it allowed me to understand more deeply his ideas and his remarks – prompts and to realize that answers to them should finish construction of principle of relativity “on Poincare”. It demanded to continue work, in particular, on disclosing of the dynamic contents of Lorentz’s transformation.
In this connection it was established, that the kinematics of the STR was not "clean" kinematics, since by the condition of mental experiment, which caused preservation of the given speed, if we used a ray of light as the tool possessing dynamic properties, i.e. force. According to this to prevent change of the given speed of the screen caused by action of the beam in the implicit form, external compensating forces are entered, which actions are fixed at reflection by change of the wave characteristic by relativistic formulas of Doppler effect in which the Lorentz’s factor fixes this change. But as Einstein explained it by property of space – time, forces entered by him in the implicit form are concerned to space - time, in this view the precondition for the answer to the second Poincare's remark-prompt about necessity of refusal of equality principle of action and counteraction that consideration and reconsideration of main provisions of classical mechanics and arguments of Abraham and Planck in favour of preservation - "rescue" of this principle demand, is created.
Re-understanding of classical mechanics confirms legitimacy of the second Poincare's remark–prompt showing that equality of action and counteraction is observed only in statics and movement of nonequilibrium systems is described in dynamics, as well as the concept of force being concept dynamic, in which this principle is observed in statics. The 3rd and 2nd laws of mechanics and D'Alember’s principle are methodical mathematical principles, which are used for description of mechanical interactions, approaching them to conditions close to the balance, the displacement infinitesimal method is used at t® 0. Newton, Eiler, D'Alember and Lagrange understood their discrepancy that compelled to accept the conditional agreement, occurrence of the new mathematical device of differential and integrated calculations and the displacement infinitesimal method providing approximate, but exact description of the phenomenon which mechanics was engaged at those small speeds and accelerations, testifies. Successful application of these mathematical methods has led to erection in physical - mechanical principles - laws.
Thus, the second Poincare's remark - prompt is proved. So the physical contents of Lorentz factor becomes value of "equilibrium" factor or "nonequilibrium" factor allowing to put forward the assumption that this factor is a factor explaining property of inertia of real substance as during acceleration moving of a body the equilibrium internal movement of a fine substance, which forms elementary particles of the fine substance made in power shells, i.e. the closed systems is broken. Thus, there is a redistribution of pulses of forces, which effect on the internal surface of power shells is accompanied by expression of counteraction, i.e. tendency to keep the position, this is expressed in property of inertia. From this it follows that , where is a factor of counteraction, "equilibrium" factor or "nonequilibrium" factor, factor of inertness of real substance. Poincare prompted those consequences of reconsideration of classical mechanics’ provisions.
We can note about arguments of Abraham and Plank in favour of "rescue" of equality principle, that Plank causes it by replacement of concepts: - “that the principle of counteraction can be rescued and only if except of concept of mechanical linear momentum known till now we enter a concept of electromagnetic linear momentum”. [ 8 p. 494] Planck's reasoning came to consideration of energy stream and he as well as Abraham and then Einstein and Lauer interpreting mathematically the proof by integration on all internal surface, thus came to the law of energy conservation. But Poincare distinguished the concepts. He did not prejudice the law of energy conservation and spoke about principle of equality of forces of action and counteraction. Nobody protested against his explanations that any action had extent and duration and consequently delay of counteraction with incomplete compensation of forces.
Poincare's works also prompted necessity of expansion of a new hypothesis of medium-ether in “the circuit of new uniform hypothesis of medium-ether, inertia and gravitation”, which was addition to the principle of relativity “on Poincare” and corresponded the concept of "unity of nature”, which Einstein tried to achieve in “the Theory of uniform field”.
Advantage of the circuit - hypothesis is its flexibility, that allows at preservation of the general idea to plan the circuit of our universe as interrelation of real substance of microcosm, macrocosm and space of all universe, perpetual circulation of exchange of substance and energy, allows to develop it coordinating with electrodynamics, theory of elementary particles, quantum mechanics, the theory of gravitation as Newton’s as relativistic, astrophysics and cosmology.
For example the formula of gravitation derived on the basis of the hypothesis shows, that it not only confirms Newton’s formula of Newtonian attraction, but opens physical contents of a gravitational constant equal .
Where - factor of substance gravitational disintegration showing weight loss of 1 g of real substance in a unit of time, n - number of Gravitons, which emit 1 g of real substance in a unit of time, - weight of graviton, Ê ³ 0 - factor of interaction describing high penetrating ability , where . It follows that gravitational constant contains three unknown constants, including rate of movement - distribution of gravitons, i.e. speed of gravitational interaction which is covariant with speed of light, and has interrelation with speed of light, but exceeds it considerably (on Laplace )* . Thus, speed of gravitational interaction contains in the gravitational constant of Newton non-reproaching him and non-attributing to him the concept of "instantaneous long-range action”.
On the other hand, preconditions for definition of three values of Newton gravitational constant in interrelation with electrodynamics, the theory of elementary particles and quantum mechanics, which exists undoubtedly are created.
In 1993-95 all aforesaid was generalized in the treatise “Theory of relativity of Einstein and principle of relativity (remarks of the naive heretic). New circuit - hypothesis of the medium - ether, inertia and gravitation” devoted to J. K. Maxwell and Anri Poincare in 700 hand-written pages and with 650 literary references. In 1996-1998 reduction of this work up to 450 pages and then up to 250 pages was carried out. In 1999 - 2000 reduction work was continued and the work was prepared for the publication in 182 hand-written pages with 52 literary references under the same name and dedication. On the basis of it two variants in 60 and 50 printed pages with 28 literary references are prepared.
End of construction of the principle of relativity “on Poincare” allows to compare it with “the principle on Einstein” and on the basis of the comparative assessment to make the intelligent free choice between them. Choosing is necessary to be guided by known basic criteria of assessments of scientific theories including the principle, which Poincare discovered while consideration of “Rotation of the Earth”: “Than physical theory is especially true, than more true relations appear from it ” [ 5 p. 280] and “ … if one of them opens us true attitudes, which do not follow from another the first one is possible to consider more true physically, than another because it has richer contents. Any doubts cannot be in this connection” [ 5 p. 280] .