Blog Ekkehard Friebe

 
 By Daniel H. Deutsch

Beitrag aus dem GOM-Projekt: 2394 weitere kritische Veröffentlichungen
zur Ergänzung der Dokumentation Textversion 1.2 – 2004, Kapitel 4. 

Local quantum relativity theory 1998

In: Physics as a science. Ed.: G. Galeczki (u. a.). Palm Harbor 1998, S. 131-145.

Kritisiert in der Darstellung seiner eigenen Theorie die Spezielle Relativitätstheorie (S. 135-138). Verwendet in seinem Text u.a. folgende eigene Abkürzungen: LIP = local intrinsic properties; DOMP = distant optically measured properties.

Nimmt die Aussagen der SRT strikt beim Wort: alle Inertialsystem (IS) sind gleichberechtigt, in allen IS gelten dieselben physikalischen Gesetze. Daher behalten alle einmal synchronisierten Uhren dieselbe Taktrate, und die behaupteten Effekte der Zeitdilatation sind rein optischer Natur. In seiner Terminologie sind die LIPS die physikalisch real gegebenen Eigenschaften (die durch die Bewegungen der IS nicht verändert werden), und die DOMPS sind die Effekte oder Eigenschaften, die nur aufgrund der Beobachtung entfernter Objekte festgestellt werden (und deshalb nicht den LIPS entsprechen).

(S. 136:) "In the STR of 1905 there a p p e a r e d  to be a contraction of a receding geometric form, when measured with light beams, in the direction of its motion, but this was an optical effect (DOMP). Similarly, receding inertial clocks were expected to  a p p e a r  to run slow when observed with light beams. The LIP of the rods and the clocks were explicitly unaltered by motion.

The DOMP of the rigid rods and inertial clocks was described quantitatively by the Lorentz transformation … […] This author finds two flaws in Einstein’s time analysis, one will be discussed latter. Since it was explicitly assumed that the clocks all kept identical rates, the  o b s e r v a t i o n  of a slowing of the moving clock is entirely an optical effect due to the time for the light signal to pass to and from the moving clock, DOMP. The LIP of the clocks remains unaltered.

When the phenomena of moving clocks is broken up into LIP and DOMP a basic understanding becomes much simpler. Once it is stipulated that all the inertial clocks keep the same time rate, there is no physical process that can alter the time keeping! In his analysis of moving clocks in 1905 Einstein made the mistake of assuming that a real physical inertial clock will behave in the same way as his hypothetical clock."

(S. 137:) "The clock paradox and the twin paradox continue as controversial aspects of STR. In 1971 Marder devoted an entire book to the subject and undoubtedly, this will not be the last. Since then scores of papers appear annually arguing the various aspects of the clock paradox. The key controversy in the clock paradox revolves around this: the STR and PSR [principle of special relativity] asserts that all IFRs [inertial frames] are equivalent and undistinguishable. Therefore, one would expect that an observer with a moving clock observing a "stationary" clock would see exactly the same time as an observer with the "stationary" clock observing the moving clock, given that the two clocks were initially synchronized."