PRESENTATION
Through our Blog, we have criticized the nonsense of
involving the deformation of space to justify the force of attraction of
gravity on bodies.
As we have recently
seen false information appear that attempts to confuse logical reasoning
regarding this issue, we add a new essay to dismantle such fallacy.
Some of these false news, pretend to rely on the idea
that: the Physicist who affirmed such a fallacy, is the same one who predicted
the existence of gravitational waves, whose existence has subsequently been
verified. It seems that these false preachers justify the fact that we must
admit the nonsense of the deformation of space since it was said by the same person
who was right with the phenomenon of gravitational waves. We think that, if
there are no hidden interests, those who reason in this puerile way commit a
fallacy of the type "argumentum ad homine"
Our criticism will be based on highlighting a false interpretation
of the Lorentz Factor and the Lorentz Transformation Formulas that lead to the
aforementioned error.
TWO MENTAL EXPERIMENTS THAT DENOUNCE THE FALLACY OF
THE DEFORMATION OF SPACE.
In this essay we include two thought experiments,
that were devised by the same author of the present
study.
We believe that the two examples are sufficiently
illustrative to refute the fallacy of the intervention of the deformation of
space as an active agent in the intervention of the force of gravity. (We
exposed these examples in our Blog, with the title: "Theory of Relativity.
- Misleading Approaches"- Third instalment- The fallacy of the deformation
of space)
We comment and summarize the cited examples.
The first
figure represents a Test Mass (for example, a stone) that, because it is
"touching" the Earth and there is no space between both masses... can
we say that there is no attractive force, such as gravity, when not be able to
deform space?... This shows that it is not the intervention of the deformation of
space that acts.
Figure 1
Figure 2 presents the case of two different masses (m1)
and (m2) that are at the same distance from the bringing Mass, that is: (d1) =
(d2). Carrying out calculations it is found that, although the space between
the attractive mass (Mt) and the two test masses (m1) and (m2) is the same, the
Attractive Force is different. What justifies that "space" does not
intervene
Figure 2
(ONE OBSERVATION: Do not confuse concepts: It is
interesting that we bear in mind that the ACCELERATION with which both Masses
are subjected is the same, but they are subjected to different Forces of
Attraction (Fa). We must consider that what we are investigating is the concept
"FORCE" and not the concept "ACCELERATION". We investigate
the cause. Not the effects. For this reason, it is interesting to take into
account this conclusion that could divert us from our objective)
THE LORENTZ FACTOR
It is known as the Lorentz Factor and is usually
represented abbreviated as (L), the mathematical operator:
Where (v) means the speed of a moving body, with
uniform and rectilinear speed, and (c) means the speed of light.
We find this expression in the well-known thought
experiment of the train car. It is obtained by looking for the relationship
between the Proper Time (tp) of the physical phenomenon that takes place inside
the wagon (the reflection of a light ray in a mirror), and the Time of
Displacement of the train wagon (td). This relationship is quantified by the
following expression:
(Note: In other essays by this same author, the mathematical
process to obtain this expression is detailed)
In the
erroneous interpretation given to this equality, the fallacy of "time
dilation" and "mass and space deformation" starts. We justify
our statement by recalling some paragraphs written in our previous essays.
In one of them we call it the GENESIS OF NONSENSE
We say that your misinterpretation comes from the
statement that we find in the book by A. Einstein, entitled: “On the theory of
special and general relativity”. Speaking of a train car inside which a process
is carried out, in this statement he says:
“The time that a process needs in relation to the
wagon cannot be equal to the duration of the same process judged from the
reference body of the embankment”
In our "little book" entitled: "Theory
of relativity. - Criticism of nonsense”, we present more than three reasons to
justify that this statement cannot be accepted as valid.
Figure 3 means the movement of the train car inside
which a beam of light is fired that is reflected in a mirror located on the
roof of the car. The round trip time of the light ray is its Proper Time (tp).
In each advance position of the wagon, the direction of the beam is
represented.
Figure 3
this absurd to argue that, since the person who is
outside the car, fixed on the ground, the end of the reflection of the light
beam has been lengthened. Light, time has dilated.
From outside the wagon: The vision of the image of the
phenomenon is lengthened. Not the proper time (tp) of the phenomenon
THE FALLACY OF THE DILATATION OF THE MASS
In this chapter we denounce another fallacy that can
lead us to the error of reasoning that "space is deformed" since, if
we consider that mass occupies a place in space, considering absurdities, we
can conclude that the space it occupies is deformed. To criticize this issue,
we transcribe a part of our book entitled “Theory of Relativity. Criticism of
nonsense analysed in seven fascicles”
We copy the following fascicle:
In this Fascicle,
taking as a reference the book of
A. Einstein entitled "Introduction to the theory
of special and general relativity", we denounce:
The fallacy of mass deformation. The error of wanting
to include simultaneous phenomena within relativity and… other confusion We
criticize the subject: “THE LENGTHENING OF THE MEASURING BAR.
Paragraph 12 of the aforementioned book that we take
as a reference is entitled: "THE BEHAVIOR OF RULES AND MOBILE CLOCKS"
It is based on the mental experiment of the train car and, summarizing its
content, it tells us that: using a bar to measure lengths, this bar will be
longer assessed from the embankment, than assessed from inside the train car.
We clarify that instead of saying "WILL BE" longer we should say:
"WE WILL SEE" longer.
We could call it as: The great confusion between the
appreciation of the dimensions of the IMAGE OF A BODY in uniform and
rectilinear movement and the real dimension of this BODY. In the lengthening of
the measuring bar, he confuses the movement of the image of the body as if it
were the body itself
Figure 4
The measuring bar has its own length (lp) which is
what
would get an
observer who was inside the car, where the bar is. Another experiment would be
the result of the SEEING, or the VISION OF THE IMAGE, of a fixed observer
located outside the train car.
We have seen written the project of trying to deduce
the well-known expression:
(End of the cited transcript)
(NOTE: See the same author of this book, the Essay
published by the scientific journal: "International Journal of Fundamental
Physics Sciences", called the expression
THE FORMULAS OF TRANSFORMATION OF LORENZ
The Lorentz factor is also found in the so-called
Lorentz Transformation Formulas.
These formulas, in inertial movements (relative
movements between two reference systems and at constant rectilinear speed)
allow to calculate the values of the variables: space (e) and time (t) in a
MOVING translation of the coordinates.
(Later we will see why we highlight the word “mobile”)
To introduce us to the topic of Lorentz Transformation
formulas, we quote the following.
In the book “On the theory of special and general
relativity” by A. Einstein, on page 32 (“Alianza Editorial” Edition), he
describes the form and utility of the formulas called Lorentz Transformations,
as follows:
“Given the quantities (x,y,z,t) of an event with
respect to (k),
What are the values (x`,y`,z´,t´) of the same
event with respect to
(k´)?”
The ratios must be chosen in such a way that they
satisfy the laws of propagation of light in a vacuum for one and the same light
ray (and also for any light ray) with respect to (K) and (K´).”
And he goes on to say:
"The problem is solved by the equations"
Space Formula
Figure 1
time formula
Figure 2
And, on this same page of the aforementioned book, the
following coordinate system (k) and (K) is drawn
Figure 4
The variable (v) means the relative speed that the
system (K´) has with respect to the system (K)The explanation that appears in
the aforementioned book, together with the previous drawing, does little to
help us understand the purpose and way of using the aforementioned formulas. So
we make a brief analysis:
For the moment we will analyse the Space Formula.
Let us observe that in the Space Formula in its
numerator the expression appears:
x-vt
In Figure 4 we see that this operation corresponds to
a transfer of the origins of the coordinate axes. This is what would happen in
a finite motion. But, we must consider that we are considering a continuous
relative motion. We are interested in knowing that we can SEE from a certain
position of the coordinates (K´), which are moving, the phenomena that occur
and have the coordinates (K) as a reference. This is the reason why we have
previously talked about a Mobile Transfer. It is not only a question of a
transfer of coordinate axes from one place to another in space, but we must
also add the intervention of the speed with which this displacement is carried
out.
The measurements of these phenomena are quantified in: space (e) and time (t). It is in this SEE operation that our well-known operator intervenes as the denominator of the formula:
Figure 5
The figure represents two SITUATIONS in outer space.
(Remember that in one of our essays we defined that
the POSITION was given by the coordinates that, in outer space, an Event
occupies with respect to a Fixed Reference System, while in the SITUATION we
added to the POSITION the concept of "time" or "instant" in
which it occurs. Thus Newton's laws are incorporated into the Events)
The left part of the figure represents the outer space
environment where the Event takes place, be it a body or the development of a
physical law. We consider it as the Fixed Reference System (FRS).
The right part of the figure represents the mobile
environment from which what happens in the (FRS) is observed. This observation
is made from a Mobile Reference System (MRS). Remember that we are dealing with
relative motions.
The (tr) represents the Travel Time of the image to
reach the observation point. The (td) represents the Travel Time that an
observer would take to SITUATE himself in the observation POSITION. (Remember
the definition we had given to these two concepts)
As we have
said, the Lorentz Factor ensures that in the Lorentz Transformation Formulas
not only the transfer of the reference coordinates is taken into account, but
also the VISUALIZATION changes due to the MOVEMENT of the (MRS).
HOW DOES THE LORENTZ FACTOR ACT IN THIS TRANSFORMATION
OF THE IMAGE?
When deducing the expression of the Lorenz Factor, the
following condition is imposed: SYNCHRONIZATION.
This condition implies that: if the observer is right
in the (FMS) when the event starts, this observer is already POSITIONED to be
able to SEE the end of the event. Therefore, in the observation position of the
(MRS) the equality must be fulfilled:
(td)=(tr)
Any SITUATION that does not meet this condition would
be impossible to SEE the content of the (FRS)
(NOTE: To make it more accessible to the reader, we
omit the integral calculus notation that defines all the possible differentials
corresponding to the infinite Situations to be considered from the beginning to
a certain end)
When we impose
this condition when calculating the referred Factor, we do nothing more than
establish a relationship between the speeds (v) and (e).
As the reader will have noticed, here we have only
operated with the vision of the image. Not with the "bodies" of the
Events.
RESUME
The numerator of the Space Transformation Formula
tells us that it is a translation of the coordinate axes. We can say that it is
a “static” operation. Just a transfer without further movement. (See figure 4)
But, in addition, in this formula appears the factor
CASE OF THE TIME FORMULA
The reader may have some doubt in the interpretation
of the Time Transformation Formula. To dispel this doubt, we say the following:
In the numerator of the formula, the expression that
appears subtracting is about a time. So it is a coordinate shift.
(NOTE: The fact that it is a "time" the
reader will find its mathematical deduction in our essay entitled: "Theory
of relativity- mathematical interpretation of the Lorentz Factor- In the
paragraph entitled: Correcting factor of speeds. Measurement travel time (td))
If the reader
is interested in following the mathematical process of obtaining the Lorentz
Factor, we refer him to our essay entitled: “Relativity Theory- Mathematical
Analysis of the Lorentz Factor”, in the paragraph entitled: “The Lorentz
Factor. A mathematical expression that appears in the Transformation Formulas”)
We finish this essay by insisting and saying once
again: The “body”, the mass, is not deformed, and consequently the space it
occupies is not deformed, but the one that is deformed by the VISION of the
IMAGE of the body. Let us remember that adage that says that: “space is what
remains of an empty room when the walls are removed”
