Einstein’s special relativity applies a not recognized physical mistake leading to an absurd interpretation of the Michelson‐Morley experiment and absurd physics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Special relativity (SR) needs different speeds of light in the horizontal arm of the Michelson‐Morley interferometer to “explain” a constant speed of light in all inertial frames. To obtain equal speeds from the two different speeds of light ( c − v ) = [(1 ‐ v/c ) × c ] and ( c + v ) = [(1 + v/c ) × c ], Einstein mathematically accelerates the speed of the photons in the direction of Earth’s motion around the Sun from [(1 ‐ v/c ) × c ] to [(1 − v 2 / c 2 ) × c], and in the opposite direction, Einstein decelerates the speed of the photons from [(1 + v/c ) × c ] to [(1 − v 2 / c 2 ) × c ]. Besides the fact that light cannot be accelerated or decelerated, a change of the speed of the photons in the inertial frame of the Sun would also change the speed c of photons on Earth, because in both inertial frames, the photons always move in horizontal light path of the Michelson‐Morley interferometer in the same direction. SR contradicts its own postulates: 1. SR contradicts the constant speed c of light on Earth; 2. SR contradicts the constant speed c of light in all inertial frames, respectively, in all frames of reference; 3. SR contradicts the principle of relativity. Einstein transformed photons into particles that are allowed to violate logical and physical laws but are not allowed to interact with gravity, so that they have to follow curved world lines. However, giving up logical and physical laws because of precise predictions of a physical theory means arguing pseudo-scientifically. Instead, a simple quantum physical explanation of gravity is presented.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".