Revised: Sept. 24, 2011

A case against Relativity theory requires several elements. First, there has to be an alternative model – such as Modern Classical Mechanics – that explains things with better accuracy than Relativity theory. Second, the alternative model should support physical behaviors (that are prohibited by Relativity theory); which are then experimentally confirmed. An example of this could be found in the recently announced CERN experiment where they have found sub-atomic particles traveling faster than the speed of light. Such a prediction is supported by Modern Classical Mechanics, but prohibited by Relativity theory.

The CERN experimental findings go hand-in-hand with the findings of mathematical and conceptual mistakes in Einstein’s work. Now, these mistakes are very difficult to find, especially when you consider that Relativity makes some very good predictions. But, we now have cases where Modern Classical Mechanics makes better predictions and, in the case of the CERN experiment, supports an experimental finding that Relativity theory says is not possible.

Episode 23 introduces Modern Classical Mechanics. We also discussed the nuances between it and Relativity theory that result in the latter needing concepts like Time Dilation, Length Contraction, and the Twin Paradox. We also review a conceptual mistake where Einstein talks about about time, without realizing that he is really talking about length. Imaging the mistakes you might make if you look at your ruler, but think you’re looking at your watch!

As indicated in Episode 20, *wavelength* is commonly misstated as a measure (e.g., meters) when, in fact, it should be correctly stated as a rate (e.g., meters per cycle). This is a significant conceptual and mathematical problem in Einstein’s work.

Most people would know a circle when you see one, and you’d be able to tell it apart from an oval. But if you don’t treat the math equation in just the right way, you might think that you have a circle when you really have an oval. This is essentially the mistake Einstein makes in his proof that establishes Relativity. You’ll see this covered in Episode 22.

Readers familiar with *namespaces* and* **overloaded variables*, and their relationship with *functions*, will find the mistake that happen when mistreating a function as an equation. This is addressed in Episode 17 of the Podcast Series – A Look at Einstein’s 1905 Derivation (Video). Simply stated, Einstein mistreats the Tau *function** *as if it were an *equation*. Readers without this background will find the algebra-based approach given in the Storrs Conference Presentation (Video), easier to follow. Interestingly, Einstein and Lorentz drop a Beta term in each of their respective derivations. This point is also discussed briefly in Episode 17 of the Podcast series.

I hope you enjoy the material at RelativityChallenge.com.