Episode 23 – Introduction to Modern Classical Mechanics

Posted by Steven Bryant On July - 18 - 2011

Modern Classical Mechanics is a new, intuitive, model that yields better than 100 times the accuracy of the Einstein-Lorentz equations in several experiments including Michelson-Morley and Ives-Stillwell!  Because it distinguishes between Length and Wavelength, its theoretical explanations avoid non-intuitive concepts like time dilation, length contraction, and the twin paradox; each of which are required by [...]

Episode 21 – The Failure of Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof

Posted by Steven Bryant On March - 21 - 2010

We have offered many mathematical and conceptual challenges to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. In Episode 21, we offer compelling evidence that Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof fails. Without this proof, Einstein cannot establish a relationship between Relativity and the constancy of the speed of light; a cornerstone characteristic of the theory.
This Episode reexamines the [...]

Episode 20 – AAAS Conference Presentation – Averages, Rates, and Functions

Posted by Steven Bryant On August - 29 - 2009

“I live 20 miles per hour from the University.” Is that statement confusing?  It should be.  In Episode 20, we take a look at Rates and Functions, and discuss how they have been mistreated for the past century.  More importantly, we’ll take a look at how key concepts and mathematics can get confused if [...]

Episode 19 (Video) – The Meaning of Moving Systems Models (CICS and SRT)

Posted by Steven Bryant On June - 15 - 2009

Do you want to know what Time Dilation is and why Einstein needed it to make Relativity work? In Episode 19, we explain what things mean.   We’ll talk about the main concepts that are important for each moving system model – Newton, Lorentz, Einstein, and the CICS Model. After watching this episode, [...]

Episode 18 (Video) – Part 2 – Comparative Analysis of Moving Systems Models

Posted by Steven Bryant On October - 6 - 2008

In Episode 18, I present Part 2 of a 2 part presentation delivered at the AAAS/NPA Conference held in April 2008 at the University of New Mexico.  This presentation compares and contrasts the models presented by Michelson-Morley, Lorentz, Einstein, and myself – clearly outlining the key assumptions behind each model.  In addition, I summarize the [...]

Episode 11 (Video) – Michelson-Morley Experiment AAAS/NPA Conference Presentation

Posted by Steven Bryant On April - 15 - 2008

In this episode, I delivery a presentation entitled Revisiting the Michelson-Morley Experiment to Reveal and Earth Orbital Velocity of 30 km/s. This presentation was originally given at the 15th Annual NPA conference on April 11, 2008 at the University of New Mexico. The conference was held in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement [...]

The news is buzzing this week with claims that researchers at the CERN, one of the world’s leading research centers, conducted an experiment that “proved” Einstein wrong. They claim that they were able to make neutrinos travel faster than the speed of light. But the media is sensationalizing things just a bit because the researchers “deliberately do not attempt any theoretical or phenomenological interpretation of the results.” [See their paper].

I’m excited by this experiment because it supports the findings that there are subtle, but significant, theoretical and mathematical mistakes in Einstein’s theory.

Also exciting, is that this experiment might be used to differentiate Modern Classical Mechanics (which is conceptually consistent with this experimental) from Relativity theory (which appears to be conceptually inconsistent with this experiment).

Over the past few days, people have asked me to summarize what is wrong with Einstein’s theory. I can summarize it as follows:

  1. His proof that establishes Relativity fails, but since it is a “false positive”, we think that it passed. Specifically, he claims to have a sphere and doesn’t. (See Episode 22)
  2. He mixes up concepts. He believes he is discussing time, when in reality he is talking about length. (See Episode 23)
  3. He mistreats wavelength as if it were length. This is equivalent to looking at your speedometer and believing that the readings are odometer readings. (See Episode 20)

We must remember that Einstein’s equations produce good results in many cases. So, this experiment is important because it could become a distinguishing experiment. Theories that support this experiment will prevail, while those that do not will undergo major revision, or will need to be jettison.

I invite you to explore the site. If you’re new, I hope you explore the papers and videos. If you’re a returning visitor, welcome back!

Until next time, Be Well!
Steve

Bookmark and Share

Episode 23 – Introduction to Modern Classical Mechanics

Posted by Steven Bryant On July - 18 - 2011Comments Off

Modern Classical Mechanics is a new, intuitive, model that yields better than 100 times the accuracy of the Einstein-Lorentz equations in several experiments including Michelson-Morley and Ives-Stillwell!  Because it distinguishes between Length and Wavelength, its theoretical explanations avoid non-intuitive concepts like time dilation, length contraction, and the twin paradox; each of which are required by Relativity theory.
Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Explaining Why Relativity Requires the Twin Paradox

Posted by Steven Bryant On May - 20 - 2011ADD COMMENTS

Title

The Twin Paradox: Why it is Required by Relativity
(Click to download)

Summary

This paper reveals that when wavelength-based observations are evaluated using a length-based perspective, that evaluation must explain changes in length and time, which Einstein does using Length Contraction and Time Dilation. It further explains that when wavelength-based observations are evaluated using a wavelength-based perspective, there are no changes in length and time, and the resulting mathematical equations yield quantitatively better results.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Episode 22 is the Failure of Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof presentation that I delivered at the 17th Annual NPA Conference held at California State University, Long Beach on 23, June 2010.  It is essentially the “Director’s Cut” of Episode 21, and expands on that material.  It shows that Einstein’s Relativity Theory derivation fails because of the failure in the Spherical Wave Proof.  Specifically, this episode covers the following:

  • Explains why the Spherical Wave Proof is The Essential Proof that established Relativity Theory
  • Shows the failure of Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof as a failure to develop a second sphere
  • Identifies the belief that the proof passes as the result of a “False Positive”, or “Type I Error”
  • Discusses implications of the failure on terms like Length Contraction, Space-Time Curvature, and Time Dilation

Viewers who have watched Episode 21 will find much of the material familiar.

Download in Windows Media Format

Bookmark and Share

The Failure of the Einstein-Lorentz Spherical Wave Proof

Posted by Steven Bryant On March - 23 - 2010ADD COMMENTS

Title

The Failure of the Einstein-Lorentz Spherical Wave Proof
(Click to download)

Summary

This paper reveals a subtle, yet extremely significant oversight in Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof. Once identified and corrected, it also shows that the proof fails, which means that Einstein cannot establish the relationship between the constancy of the speed of light and the principle of relativity.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Episode 21 – The Failure of Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof

Posted by Steven Bryant On March - 21 - 2010Comments Off

We have offered many mathematical and conceptual challenges to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. In Episode 21, we offer compelling evidence that Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof fails. Without this proof, Einstein cannot establish a relationship between Relativity and the constancy of the speed of light; a cornerstone characteristic of the theory.

This Episode reexamines the key characteristics of a Sphere, and uses those characteristics to show why Einstein’s proof actually fails. The following specific points are covered in this video:

  • A look at Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof
  • A look at the textual and mathematical requirements of a Sphere
  • Review of Einstein’s work to show that his equations do not satisfy the requirements

In addition to the video, a PDF version of the presentation is available for download.
Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Episode 20 – AAAS Conference Presentation – Averages, Rates, and Functions

Posted by Steven Bryant On August - 29 - 2009Comments Off

“I live 20 miles per hour from the University.” Is that statement confusing?  It should be.  In Episode 20, we take a look at Rates and Functions, and discuss how they have been mistreated for the past century.  More importantly, we’ll take a look at how key concepts and mathematics can get confused if we don’t say the right thing.  For example, would you feel confused if I had began with “I live 20 miles from the University.”?  This Episode is a replay of a presentation that I delivered the Pacific Region AAAS conference at San Francisco State University in August 2009.

This Episode summarizes and synthesizes a lot of the material we’ve looked at over the past 9 videos.  New visitors will find that it serves as a good introduction to the material on the site.

The following specific points are covered in this video:

  • A brief history of moving systems equations and SRT
  • A look at the mathematical and conceptual mistakes we’re still making today
  • Revisiting the improved results to the Michelson-Morley and Ives-Stillwell equations
  • Implications on position-based navigation systems

In addition to the video, a PDF version of the presentation is available for download.
Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Episode 19 (Video) – The Meaning of Moving Systems Models (CICS and SRT)

Posted by Steven Bryant On June - 15 - 2009Comments Off

Do you want to know what Time Dilation is and why Einstein needed it to make Relativity work? In Episode 19, we explain what things mean.   We’ll talk about the main concepts that are important for each moving system model – Newton, Lorentz, Einstein, and the CICS Model. After watching this episode, you should be able to explain the key concepts of Relativity such as Time Dilation and Length Contraction.  This knowledge is beneficial to both supporters of, and challengers to, Special Relativity.  We will explain why Einstein needed these terms for this theory to make sense and how they are based on an incomplete understanding of Transformations and Wavelength. And we’ll address why our modern understanding of Transformations and Wavelength, as incorporated into the CICS Model, results in a model that is free of Time Dilation and Length Contraction. This video ends with a comparison of the moving system models and where they differ conceptually from one another.

The following specific points are covered in this video

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

The Significance of Distinguishing Functions from Algebraic Equations

Posted by Steven Bryant On March - 17 - 2009Comments Off

Title

The Significance of Distinguishing Functions from Algebraic Equations
(Click to download)

Summary

This paper answers the question from a syntax perspective:  ”Why is the ‘t’ variable in Einstein’s Tau equation different than the ‘t’ variable in the x’=x-vt equation“?  In answering this question, the concepts of scope, namespaces, global variables, and local variables are introduced.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

39 Rules for Being a Scientific Change Agent versus a Crackpot

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 10 - 2009Comments Off

Last year , a friend posted to his blog a brief excerpt of an NPR radio show which pitted a Special Relativity challenger against one of its supporters. During the introduction, the reporter mentioned a test developed by a UC Riverside mathematician. This test, The Crackpot Index , is a combination of satire and seriousness. In reality, it highlights a number of common pitfalls that are repeatedly made by those challenging the establishment. If you score too high on this test, you will be labeled a Crackpot.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bookmark and Share

Recent Comments