THE DEFORMATION OF SPACE - AN ERROR BY A. EINSTEIN

PRESENTATION

To the fallacy of “time dilation”, which we had already studied, A. Einstein needed to add another nonsense of logic to be able to create a “science fiction novel”. It is about “the deformation of space”. So it seemed that everything was adding up.

The bad thing is that he had disciples, and still has, who tried to support such a "novel." If there were no hidden interests, we are surprised that some scientific researchers committed such an outrage against science. We will comment on this in the paragraph entitled: "The fallacy of the false cause".

We take advantage of our essay to vindicate Newton's reasoning against Einstein's.

When we transcribe a text by other authors, we will write it in quotation marks and in italics.

 

THE THESIS OF A. EINSTEIN

About the "deformation of space" we have read the following:

“A. Einstein said, denying Newton, that gravity was not a force that attracted things, but that things do not move when they are attracted to something, but when they are pushed, and by this he meant that if something falls on something else, it is not because it is attracted to it, but because that thing curves space like a whirlpool in a bathtub. “

He continues the writing by saying the following:

“In Einstein's universe, continues the researcher, space and time are deformed by gravity. The Earth distorts the space around it ever so slightly because of its gravity.”

The following figure is the one we find in some treatises on this subject:

                                

Note the reader that the historian from whom we have transcribed part of his writing, begins by saying: "A. Einstein said, denying Newton..."

We will try to validate Isaac Newton.

HOW DID THE RESEARCHERS THOUGHT TO PROVE EINSTEIN'S THESIS?

The researchers thought that the Sun, due to its Gravity, would curve space, in such a way that this phenomenon would become appreciable in the perception of the position of starlight.

(NOTE: On the historical fact of the experiments that were carried out to try to demonstrate the validity of A. Einstein's thesis, the reader can read it on the Web page, in the topic: "How the general theory of relativity was demonstrated". The image that we give is the one that appears in the aforementioned story).

DISADVANTAGES TO OBSERVE THE PHENOMENON

The story goes that the inconvenience to observe the phenomenon was that the light from the Sun would not allow us to see and portray the deflection of the light from the stars. They had to wait for eclipses of the Sun to occur and these occurred periodically in different places on Earth. Several expeditions were made according to the appearance of the eclipses.

A sketch of the distribution of the actors participating in the experiment could be the following:

THE FALLACY OF THE FALSE CAUSE.- AN IMPROPER

In the aforementioned expeditions, unless some historian rectifies us, we believe that an absurdity was committed:

Instead of going to find out the CAUSE they went to report an EFFECT.

And, with this error, they could contribute little to science. Even if the EFFECT was photographed, it contributed little to the validity of Einstein's thesis. For this reason we call such an experiment as "THE FALLACY OF THE FALSE CAUSE".

OTHER CRITICISMS OF THE REFERRED EXPERIMENT

In addition to not fulfilling the experiment with the required purpose, the dubious results obtained in his photographs were also criticized.

The famous physicist Stephan Hawking said the following: "The results obtained by Eddington were a matter of knowing in advance the results that one wanted to obtain."

They also accuse the expedition group "Prince" of manipulation. A reason for discussion is pointed out in a veiled manner, which tipped for success or failure, when the experiments were carried out just after the First World War and their possible resentments.

 

THE REFLECTION OF LIGHT, A PHENOMENON ALREADY KNOWN IN ANCIENT TIMES

A physical phenomenon that goes against the deformation of space as a cause for two masses to come together is the phenomenon of the deflection of light due to gravity. This phenomenon was already taken into consideration by Newton.

(NOTE: In a future study entitled: "The deflection of light. Interpretation of a confusing thought experiment", we will expand this topic).

Years ago, in one of our books we made the following drawing that represents the deformation of the deformed VISION of a body close to the attraction of gravity, due to the deformation of light. BEWARE! Do not associate it with the deformation of the mass as explained by A. Einstein in the chapter on the "measuring bar", criticized in another of our studies.

The figure represents a body referenced by the coordinates (X, Y, Z) in outer space. The vision (light) of this body is distorted by the presence of a gravitational field.

A CONTRADICTION TO THE DEFORMATION OF SPACE AS THE CAUSE OF THE APPROACH BETWEEN TWO MASSES

The following diagram represents the Earth and a mass on top of it. "stuck" to her.

Can we affirm that, because there is no space between them, it is possible to start off the ground and lift the mass without any effort? Is it not true that it costs more to lift a mass of ten kilos from the ground than a mass of one kilo, if the masses are "stuck" to the ground? And in this case space does not intervene.

Experience confirms that the deformation of space as the cause of the "fall" of one mass on top of another is a fallacy.

 

ANOTHER ARGUMENT TO DISCARD THE DEFORMATION OF SPACE

DIFFERENT MASSES AT EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE ATTRACTIVE MASS.-

The following scheme represents two different masses (M1) and (M2 ) located with respect to the mass of the Earth (MT) at the same distance: (d1) = (d2)

In the next paragraph we will demonstrate that although the space, measured by the distances (d1) and (d2) is the same, the Attractive Force of (MT) to each mass is different.

Hence:

If two different masses, at the same distance from the attractive mass (MT), perceive different attractive forces from this attractive mass, we deduce that "space" does not intervene.

 

TWO DIFFERENT MASSES AT THE SAME DISTANCE FROM THE ATTRACTIVE MASS SUPPORT DIFFERENT FORCES OF ATTRACTION.

We will use the resources provided by Isaac Newton to show that two different masses at the same distance from the attracting mass support different forces of attraction.

Considering A. Einstein's nonsense that materialized space, deforming it and “selling it to us” in pieces, we have chosen to use more solvent tools to deal with the issue of the Force of Gravity. We will rely on the tools provided to us by the prestigious genius Isaac Newton. We believe that, at the same time, we vindicate Newton's position against Einstein.

We try to show that:

At equal distance to the attracting mass of two different masses, the forces of attraction to these masses are different

Let's remember Newton's formula of attraction of the masses

In which

(Fa) is the Force of Attraction exerted by an attractive mass (M) on another attracted mass (m)

(d)2 is the square of the distance between the two masses

(G) is the universal gravitational constant.

(NOTE: The validity of this formula has been verified and contrasted empirically. The value of the universal gravitation constant is also verified, among other experiments, with the Cavendish experiment, so we can certify the previous formula.

We also clarify a question that the reader might have. Remember that the acceleration acquired by the two masses in their free fall is the same. Precisely because the "mass" of each of them and the "force" to which the bodies are subjected intervene in this acceleration)

In the example that we have given in the previous paragraph, in which (d1) = (d2) and assuming two different masses (m1) and (m2), for these masses the Forces of Attraction will be:

(Fa)1 =  

     

and       

(Fa)2=

So if (M) is the same for the two attracted masses and also the value (d2) is common for the two masses:

Then, since (m1) is different from (m2), also (Fa)1 is different from

(Fa)2 which is what we have exposed in the previous paragraph.

We believe that in this way Newton wins the battle against Einstein.

 

A DOUBT: If we do not admit the deformation of space and if the concept "field of forces" is an abstract and intangible idea that does not describe the cause of the mutual attraction of two masses, perhaps the attraction of masses occurs between common microelements of the masses. Could it be the neutrinos?... We leave this subject for the investigation of the experts in this subject, it were not the case in which we would fall into fallacies and nonsense like the ones we are criticizing.