Three Serious Mistakes in Einstein’s Original Paper of Special Relativity in 1905
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is revealed in this paper that there were three serious mistakes in the Einstein’s original paper in 1905. Einstein did not prove that the motion equation of classical electromagnetic field could satisfy the invariance of the Lorentz coordinate transformation. The Einstein’s derivations on the formulas of transverse and longitudinal masses, as well as the calculation on the mass-energy relation are wrong. 1. In order to prove that the classical Maxwell electromagnetic field equation satisfied the invariance of Lorentz transformation in free space without charged and current, Einstein introduced the transformations of electromagnetic fields themselves, called the Einstein’s transformations of electromagnetic fields. However, these transformations are completely different from the Lorentz transformations of electromagnetic fields themself, which leads to contradiction and does not hold. 2. For the electromagnetic field equations in non-free space with charge and current, the Einstein’s transformations can not make the electromagnetic fields unchanged under the Lorentz transformation. 3. The constitutive equations of electromagnetic theory in the medium do not satisfy the invariance of the Lorentz transformation too. Therefore, the classical electromagnetic field equations have no the invariance of the Lorentz transformation actually, and the most important theoretical and experimental basis of special relativity do not exist. 4. The Einstein's derivations on the formulas of transverse and longitudinal masses have a series of elementary mistakes in mathematics and physics. Einstein took the relative speed between two reference frames as the arbitrary moving velocity of a particle, and the obtained formulas were completely different from the existing mass-velocity of special relativity. 3. When Einstein derived the mass-energy relationship, he only calculated the work done by the force in the x-axis direction of particle’s motion, ignoring the work done by the force at the y- and z-axes directions. Meanwhile, the constant relative motion velocity between two reference frames was misused as the variable arbitrary velocity of a particle. Therefore, Einstein had not derived the mass-velocity formula and mass-energy relationship used in the present special relativity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".