Einstein's Special Relativity errors

Anyone else figured out that Special Relativity must be one big error?
Anyone figured out why they still push it like its a drug?
Anyone think they can defend the theory against rational thought?

Can you disprove it with your "rational thought"?

Feel free to do so here... maybe even write a book and have it published in a scientific journal.

Then how else would you explain the inconsistency of Newtonian mechanics with Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism and the lack of experimental confirmation for a hypothesized luminiferous aether?

I don't consider it any value to have a paper published in a "respectable" journal. I think the publishing houses are biased heavily with a religious belief that can be called "Scientism". Its basically just the old mystical kabbalistic teachings embraced by Zionists and repackaged to look like science. Einstein and his mates were Zionists.

But anyway, as Einstein used nothing but thought experiments, I can too.

And Maxwell's Equations themselves are not perfect, just approximate, and dont work for systems in motion, hence the invention of the fudge called Lorentz Transform.

I don't have a hypothesis to prove, I'm just claiming that Relativists don't have any rational, sensible and logical base for their faith.

So if you are a Relativist disciple, its up to you to provide proofs.

If we are going to engage in any discussion on Relativity, i will only permit the consideration of the Hypothesis and thought experiments alone. Please don't think you can just jump to some "experimental proof" when you hit a problem with the hypothesis of Einstein.

If the Hypothesis cant stand critical review, then any interpretation of the results of some experiment are not going to save the theory. You cant "prove" a theory with experiments, only maybe prove that its wrong.

So to kick off, lets start at square one. Do you think you can explain rationally, the thought experiment involving a light clock in a moving carriage and two observers? (to explain time dilation)

and the existence or not of an Aether has not been proved either way.
People who believe in Aether think that space is FULL of it.

In fact, Lawrence Krauss has stated that space is NOT empty, but FULL of "virtual Particles that pop in and out of existence", one could easily just say there is the Aether!

Incorrect. There is quite a lot of math behind the theory of general relativity.



Is this because you aren't smart enough to come up with a hypothesis?



Incorrect. It is up to you who must prove to us that the theory of general relativity is incorrect and explain exactly where is is wrong.



Incorrect again. If we are going to engage in any discussion on Relativity you do not get to dictate that we only use the "consideration of the Hypothesis and thought experiments".

We can and should also discuss the math behind it.



Present your "critical review". You are the one challenging general relativity. you must explain where is is wrong. Present your so called critical review.

So clearly you don't wish to discuss this topic.

You believe Relativity is correct, you are making the claim that is is. the burden of proof lies with you.

I'm just saying that your proof has irreconcilable errors which I can point out if you want to run through the standard hypothesis.

Maybe you cant explain it?

No. It is you who clearly doesn't wish to discuss this topic.

Present your critical review.

So you could care less about knowing more about your surroundings and understanding them.

And by the rest of your post, it sounds like you follow the musings of Cant

If its all the same with your guys, Ill just wait till someone comes along who is actually willing and knowledgeable enough to discuss the hypothesis.

Ah... so you have no critical review to present.

What you want is for us to start randomly talking about parts of the theory of Special Relativity, so that you can shoot them down piece meal.



Present YOUR thesis as to why and were exactly it is wrong!

Man-up dude... put your ego where your typing fingers are... right here and now.

No hypothesis to present?

Can I play, Can I Play!!

The laws of physics are invariant (i.e., identical) in all inertial systems (i.e., non-accelerating frames of reference).

WRONG!!!

It says right in the Discworld archives that sunlight spills across the landscape like water and puddles and pools. So the physics explaining our sunrise is different than the physics that explain a Discworld sunrise.
And since there is an infinite amount of universes in the multi-verse, this must be true some where.
And each universe is (presumably) a self-contained inertial system.

Prove Me Wrong!!

WRONG!!!

(See how I did that... by underlining I made you more wrong. )