5.-6. April 2014: 2nd Rational Physics Conference, Salzburg

2nd Rational Physics Conference 5. – 6. April 2014, Salzburg, Austria
THIS NOT-FOR-PROFIT CONFERENCE has been organised independently of any academic or research institute or of any scientific society. There are no commercial, industrial or political interests involved. This is uncommon but ensures that no influence is exerted upon speakers or participants to force compliance with the authority of any that seek to foist dogmatic views upon Mankind in order to turn a profit, be it financial or social standing. Contemporary physics has lost contact with physical reality. Mysticism and fancy has resulted in quite irrational notions being proposed to account for the physical Universe. This conference is a return to rational physics in terms that are comprehensible to any educated person, not just a small group of specialists.

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

Why Einstein failed to refute the theory of relativity 2005

By Pentcho Valev

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

Why Einstein failed to refute the theory of relativity: [datiert: 1.4.05] / Pentcho Valev. In: The general science journal. 2005 – 2 S. = http://wbabin.net/valev/valev5.pdf
Auszüge: „In Section 22 in his „Relativity“ Einstein denounces the validity of the postulate of constancy of the speed of light in a gravitational field: „A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position.“ 

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

The mistakes of Einstein: recapitulation; basic questions 2010

By Christos A. Tsolkas

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

The mistakes of Einstein: recapitulation; basic questions / Christos A. Tsolkas. In: The General science journal. 2010 – 4 S. = http://wbabin.net/weuro/tsolkas37.pdf 
The Theory of Relativity (Special and General) is proven, both in theory and experimentally, to be a completely false theory of Physics, and this – as today’s “great” University Professors, etc, finally need to understand – is because:

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

RELATIVITY – joke or swindle? 1988

By Louis Essen

Als Ergänzung unseres Beitrags vom 6. 9. 2013 bringen wir nachstehend eine weitere Arbeit von Dr. Louis Essen aus dem Jahre 1988:  

RELATIVITY – joke or swindle? 
Louis Essen re-states his view that Einstein’s theory of relativity contains basic and fatal flaws.
Quelle: ESSEN, L (1988): Electronics & Wireless World, p. 126-127, February 1988

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

A criticism of the special theory of relativity

By Louis Essen  1981

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

A criticism of the special theory of relativity / L. Essen. In: Kammerer, E.: Schwindel als Wissenschaft. 1981. (2 S.) Abdruck aus: Wissen im Werden. 12. 1976, H. 2/3.

Auszüge: „The general acceptance and continued teaching of the special theory of relativity is, in my view, hindering the progress of physical science by discouraging the search for a more rational theory.

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

Questions about the speed of light 2005

By Robert R. Traill

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

Questions about the speed of light – by P. Lenard: from „Fragen der Lichtgeschwindig- keit“ (1921, in: Astronomische Nachrichten, 213(5079), columns 303-308); (originally submitted 18 April 1921) / P. Lenard; [Übers. u. Bearb.:] R.R.Traill. In: The General science journal. 2005 – 7 S. = http://wbabin.net/physics/traill.htm

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

The plain truth about relativity 2005

By Robert D. Tieman

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

The plain truth about relativity: excerpts from „Einstein’s solution: 99 years and change“ [datiert: 9.4.05] / Robert D. Tieman. In: The general science journal. 2005 – 11 S. =
http://wbabin.net/tieman3/tieman3.htm 
Auszüge:
„This analysis pertains to the verification of the Fitzgerald-Lorentz Transformations as accepted by the modern day physics community as pertaining to Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity (STR). I have broken this treatment down to as simple an explanation as I could possibly give to the layman.

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

Complaint to the German Parliament about Dr. Philipp Rösler, Federal Minister of Technology and Economics Affairs (CERN Experiment)

 

Von Jocelyne Lopez

 I refer to my paper for the 20th Natural Philosophy Alliance (College Park, MD, United States – July 2013) CERN Experiment: Are neutrinos indeed faster than light? and inform about the new development:

Mr. Norbert Lammert, President of the German Bundestag [Parliament]

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

Real or imaginary space-time? Reality or relativity?

By Charles Kenneth Thornhill 1996

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

Real or imaginary space-time? Reality or relativity? / C. K. Thornhill. In: Hadronic journal. 11. 1996, Nr. 3, S. 209 – 224. Auch unter: http://www.etherphysics.net/CKT4.pdf

Abstract. – The real space-time of Newtonian mechanics and the ether concept is contrasted with the imaginary space-time of the non-ether concept and relativity.

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »

Forgotten history 2004

By Caroline H. Thompson

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

Forgotten history / Caroline Thompson. – [United Kingdom]: WWW 2004. 11 S. 
URL: http://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1/History/forgotten.htm

Whether or not there is conscious effort by „the establishment“ to support the reigning paradigms by presenting distorted versions of history, the fact is that the text books and popular literature abound with misleading statements and occasional outright falsehoods. If established scientists believe in something, why should they tell historians and science writers the whole truth? After all, it will only confuse them!

Den ganzen Beitrag lesen »