THEORY OF RELATIVITY - IT IS POSSIBLE THAT A PARTICLE CAN TRAVEL FASTER THAN THE SPEED OF LIGHT

PRESENTATION

Contrary to what is said in the book by A. Einstein entitled: "On the theory of special and general relativity" (Ediciones Altaya S.A. 1999), where it is stated that the speed of light (c) cannot be exceed, we make a mathematical approach to show that a particle can exceed this speed.

When we transcribe some content of the book that we take as a reference, we will write it in quotation marks and italics.

 

1.-WHERE DOES IT APPEAR THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT CANNOT BE EXCEEDED?

On page 36 of the book that we take as a reference, after making an application of the formula of the space of Lorentz Transformations, the following sentence appears:

“For speed v = c it would be

and for even higher speeds the root would become imaginary. From this we infer that in the theory of relativity speed (c) plays the role of a limiting speed that no real body can reach or exceed. We add that this role of velocity (c) as limiting velocity follows from the Lorentz Transformation equations themselves because they lose all meaning when (v) is chosen greater than (c). “

The fact that an equation "loses all meaning" for some values of its variables, perhaps this sentence already indicates that it is not choosing the right path to assess what it intends. If this equation were adequate, we believe that, referring to the variables that compose it, it would have to define for which values it loses its field of validity. It should not be the equation that "loses its meaning" but we must define when its variables lose their field of validity.

Of course, these equations lose all meaning when (v) is greater than (c) since they do not precisely serve the purpose they want to give them… In this case, the observer has no field of vision of the Event to be observed. But he has nothing to do with the fact that the event does not exist and moves at any speed.

We must choose the appropriate mathematical approach so that between the comparison of the speed' (v) of a moving body and the speed of light (c) this incompatibility does not occur. This is what we are going to study.

 

2.- GEOMETRIC APPROACH TO THE OBSERVATION OF AN EVENT THAT OCCURS IN SIDERAL SPACE

In the study of the vision of the appearance of an Event that occurs in outer space, observed from a Mobile Reference System, we will proceed as follows:

We locate three points in outer space. A point (E) will be identified as the place where the Event appeared or was born. Another dot (F) will represent the end of the Event duration. We will identify it as the end of your EXTENSION. A third point (PO) will be the observation point of the Event. To carry out the calculations, these three points will be distributed in such a way that they form a right triangle.

The figure represents that the situation where the event is born is fixed (SRF). The point of observation (PO) is mobile (SRM). It can be moved, of course, always considering the figure of the right triangle.

With this geometric figure we can represent all the variables and parameters that intervene in the observation process carried out from a (SRF), of an Event that happens in a (SRM). With the help of this geometric figure we can make the approach that will allow us to obtain the mathematical expression:  

known as the Lorentz Factor.

The interpretation of the previous figure is the following:

We want to observe from a moving point (PO), the Extension of the Event. This Extension is represented in the drawing by: c.(tp ), where (c) is the speed of light and (tp) which we will call the Event's Own Time. Because the point (PO) is mobile, we include it within a Mobile Reference System (SRM).

The variable (td) represents the Displacement Time of an observer to locate himself at the point of observation (PO), having started from point (F). We identify this point (F) to mark the end of: c.(tp). We consider this point (F) as the starting point of the displacement, since we have to ensure that when the observation point (PO) is reached, the entire Extension of the Event has already been developed. (Note the reader that it is a geometric condition that we are imposing). The variable (tr) means the travel time. Therefore: c.(tr) is the space that exists between the point (E) of appearance of the Event and its observation point. It is the path of the image. It is necessary that the information on the appearance of the Event has arrived from the point (PO).

These will be the "rules of the game" that govern the observation of an Event that occurs in a certain place in outer space and that a mobile observer (relative movements) observes its appearance and duration.

 

3.-VISION CONDITIONS OF AN EVENT AND MATHEMATICAL APPROACHES TO MEET THIS CONDITION

In order to observe an Event, which occurs at a certain point (E) in outer space, from a mobile observation point (PO), two VISION CONDITIONS OF THE EVENT will be:

That the observer is already located at the point of observation (PO) and that the image of the Event has also reached this point.

We can choose two different mathematical approaches to meet the Viewing Conditions of the Event.

SYNCHRONIZATION CONDITION.

This condition requires that the travel time (tr) of the Event image, from point (E) to point (PO), be equal to the observer's displacement time (td), from point (F) to point (PO). That is (tr) = (td)

APPROACH TO COMPENSATION IN TRAVEL S

We will call another mathematical approach that we can give to fulfill the Viewing Conditions of the Event: “Compensation Approach in the Routes.

We will assume that, for the vision of the Event and the arrival of the observer to arrive together at the same point of observation (PO), if the speed (v) of the observer is greater than the speed of light (c) in the path performed by the light (the Event image), then we will also assume that its travel time (td) is less than the travel time (tr) of the Event image.

That is: If (v) > (c) implies that (td) < (tr)

When considering carrying out the necessary mathematical calculation to obtain the formula that allows us to assess the Own Time (tp) of an Event, we will forget about the Synchronization condition and we will consider the possibility that a higher velocity (v) can be compensated with a lower Travel Time (td)

This approach will make the final formula that allows us to value (tp) have a different structure from the one that would be obtained by applying the Synchronization condition and with this "do not lose meaning" as A. Einstein says in his book.

 

4.- TWO INCOMPATIBLE EVENTS IN MATHEMATICS

We can choose two paths (two mathematical models) to visualize and be able to quantify the value of (tp). But, although both allow the value of (tp) to be obtained, one of them is limited and produces a mathematical incompatibility depending on which values are assigned to its variable (v).

Starting from the right triangle that serves as a mathematical pattern, we say the following:

If we impose: (tr) = (td) (a condition)

Y

we assume (v) > (c) (another condition)

this assumption produces an inconsistent event in mathematics

since then implies that: (td). (v) > (tr). (c)

Y

In a right triangle, it is inconsistent that one leg is greater than its hypotenuse.

This mathematically incompatible path is the one chosen by the author of the aforementioned book to justify the invalidity of the factor

of Lorentz when (v) is equal to (c)

However, in a later essay we will see that the path of considering the Synchronization condition leads us to give us a result that will be useful to start another analysis. It is for these that in the following paragraph we explain its mathematical development.

 

5.- MATHEMATICAL DEVELOPMENT TO OBTAIN THE OWN TIME (TP) OF AN EVENT, APPLYING THE SYNCHRONIZATION CONDITION

In order to do the calculations to obtain the display and the value of (tp) from the point of observation of the Event (PO), we are going to impose the SYNCHRONIZATION condition. so it must start from the point (F) in which the full extent of the Event can already be seen. In addition, another condition is that it arrives at the point (PO) precisely when the Event image has arrived. Therefore, when the calculation process begins, we will impede the condition:

                                          (td) = (tr)

and the value (tr) is replaced by its equivalent (td).

To start the mathematical study we will observe the figure that we have drawn in paragraph 2, and we will proceed to develop the calculations, applying the Pythagorean Theorem.

                   
Demanding the fulfillment of the Synchronization Condition:

                                  (td) = (tr)

allows us to substitute (tr) for (td) with what is obtained:

 

Grouping terms we have:

We can transform the denominator as follows:

                

And from here we get:    

In the previous formula, the expression: 

is known as the Lorentz Factor. 

Let's remember that this approach is the one that produces an incompatible ucess in mathematics, but it is precisely the one that A accepted. Einstein and his followers.

6.- MATHEMATICAL DEVELOPMENT TO OBTAIN THE (Tp) USING THE COMPENSATION APPROACH IN THE ROUTES

We can give another approach to assess the Own Time (tp) of an Event (E), which occurs in a Fixed Reference System (SRF), from another Mobile Reference System (SRM).

In this other approach, we will enforce the VISION CONDITIONS OF THE EVENT in a different way than what we have explained in the previous paragraph. We will use the Compensation Approach in the Walkthroughs.

Remember that this approach implies that a higher value of the variable (v) implies a lower value of the variable (td), that is, we will justify the following:

                           If v > c implies that (td) < (tr)

With this justification and NOT taking into account the equality

(tr) = (td) that we had commented on in the previous case, we proceed to develop the path to obtain the value of the Own Time (tp) of the Event and with it its Extension (c. (tp)).

We will use the figure we have drawn in paragraph 2 as an observation guideline. The steps to follow are the following:

 

With what we have obtained the proper time of the event.

We ask ourselves: is this mathematical expression obtained valid? If it is valid, we can accept that a particle traveling in the direction of the axis (X) of the aforementioned drawing, can reach a speed: (v) > (c).

We must study the field of validity of the previous formula.

 

7.- FIELD OF VALIDITY OF THE RESPONSE OBTAINED USING THE COMPENSATION APPROACH IN THE ROUTES

We will analyze the field of validity of the formula:

            

that we have obtained in the previous paragraph.

We check if the condition is met:   

    

It would be zero when:

     

  = 

and this would imply c×tr=v×td

Considering the geometric pattern that has served as the basis for the mathematical development, we see that in this right triangle it is impossible for the hypotenuse to be the same as one of the legs. Consequently, the value of the radicand cannot be zero. So, using geometry, we can state mathematically that a particle can travel at speeds greater than the speed of light.

The formula would also be valid when (v) was much smaller than (c), that is: v<<<c. Then it would happen that, very approximately, tp = tr

Which would indicate that we were at the starting point (F) in which the path of the image of the light is equal to the Extension of the Event.

(NOTE: Delving a little deeper into the issue of the validity of the formula we have obtained, we could ask ourselves what would happen if we considered speeds (v) much higher than that of light. That is, if (v)>>>(c) This would vary the values of the right triangle on which the formulation of the formula is based, obtaining a very small displacement on the base leg and a very large TOwn time (tp), so that the Extension: c.(tp) of the event would be very large. Realize that now we are not evaluating exclusively the value: v^2/c^2 but its routes through its time. Perhaps this is the behavior of the particles?... We leave this question for to be judged by microparticle experts)

(NOTE: In the booklet "Theory of relativity.- Critique of nonsense analyzed in seven installments" you will find seven topics for debate on this theory.

 

 

GENERAL THEORY OF RELATIVITY. A STORY OF SCIENCE FICTION

PRESENTATION

The Theory of General Relativity introduces the idea of validating the possibility that relative movements between bodies can be carried out at accelerated speeds. In this essay we will demostrate that this idea can be classified as science fiction. We could say that he exposes an absurd argument as long as the Theory “comes out”. We will show that this argument that is called the Equivalence Principle is a fallacy.

To carry out our criticism we have used the book by A. Einstein entitled: "On the theory of special and general relativity" (Ediciones Altaya S.A. February 1999). The transcriptions we make of this book are written in quotation marks and italics.

In the last paragraph of this study (Paragraph 9) we have transcribed from the aforementioned book the mental experiment of the "elevator", which A. Einstein uses to validate the Principle of Equivalence, the basis of the Theory of General Relativity. We suggest the reader to read it before starting the reading of this essay.

 

1.- A CRITERION FOR ELIMINATION OF THE VALIDITY OF ACCELERATED SPEEDS IN RELATIVE MOVEMENTS

In our critique of the elevator thought experiment, we rely on the following elimination criteria:

Planet Earth travels in outer space at a CONSTANT speed of 30 km/sec. In this way all bodies and natural phenomena travel along with it at this speed. We ask ourselves: What would happen if the Earth did not travel at a constant speed, but rather its speed was accelerated? We can already imagine that the bodies that are "on top" of it would slide on it, circling around this planet.

By comparison to the aforementioned example, we cannot admit that, in the mental experiment of the elevator, he proposes accelerated movements of a "CONTAINER", or we will also call it a "PLATFORM", taking for granted natural phenomena, their masses and their laws, which are the CONTENT of this PLATFORM. In conclusion, the application of accelerated velocities to the Theory of Relativity is NONNESS!

In the next paragraphs we will talk about the PLATFORMS and their CONTENTS and also the error, by the author of the aforementioned book, of making the equivalence of results between the accelerated speed of a PLATFORM and a gravitational field, thus believing that its effects fulfill the same purpose. 

 

2.- A CONTRADITION OF CRITERIA

On page 18 of the aforementioned book is written what is called the Principle of Relativity:

“If K' is a coordinate system that moves uniformly and without rotation with respect to K, then natural phenomena occur with respect to K' According to the same general laws as with respect to K. “

Note, the reader, that this Principle is referring to uniform speeds, but we believe that if the author of the book expands his theory considering accelerated speeds, he will have to demonstrate that the aforementioned Principle continues to be fulfilled, which, in accordance with what was stated in the previous paragraph, this does not happen. This is the CONTRADICTION that we highlight in the title of this paragraph.

 

3.- PLATFORMS AND CONTENTS

In some essays that we have criticized topics of the Theory of Relativity, we have used Mathematics to develop our study. In this study we rely on Physics. This is true since the author of the mental experiment uses terms that must be refuted using physical means.

Since in the mental experiment that A. Einstein uses to justify the "postulate of general relativity" he uses a drawer or an elevator, the first thing we are going to comment on is the CONTAINER and the CONTENT that the aforementioned experiment uses. The CONTAINER would be the elevator and the CONTENT would be the Masses that it contains. But, to make our study more general, we will call the Container "PLATFORM". With this denomination we want to convey the idea that there are CONTENTS inside or on top of it. For example, the "elevator" of the mental experiment is a PLATFORM because inside it is mentioned that it has CONTENTS and, also, we can consider the planet Earth as a PLATFORM because "above" it there are CONTENTS. Understanding the meaning of the word PLATFORM, in the following paragraphs we will use the word PLATFORM instead of CONTAINER.

The following figure is intended to mean two PLATFORMS that have CONTENTS

                                                  Fig 1

   
On the left side of the drawing, the "elevator" mentioned in the aforementioned mental experiment has been represented as a PLATFORM. The Masses that are drawn, the CONTENT, are inside the PLATFORM.

The right part of the drawing is intended to signify a portion of the planet Earth. In this case the PLATFORM is the Earth. The Masses, the CONTENT, is on its surface.

On both PLATFORMS their CONTENTS travel with them at the same speed.

We repeat the postulate that we have transcribed in the previous paragraph:

"If K' is a coordinate system that moves uniformly and without rotation with respect to K, then natural phenomena occur with respect to K' According to the same general laws as with respect to K. "

To better interpret this postulate, we say the following: The coordinate system (K`) is also called: Mobile Reference System (SRM), and we interpret it as a PLATFORM that moves in outer space. Within it their CONTENTS occur or are stored. These contents are the natural phenomena that develop according to their physical laws.

The coordinate system (K), we call it Fixed Reference System (SRF). It is also a PLATFORM. It is an observation PLATFORM and, in this case, immobile with respect to the (SRM). This Platform is dedicated to the observation of the CONTENT of everything that it contains and occurs in the (SRM) and is the position or point of reference of the (SRM).

Only as a complement we can add the following. In the book that we take as a reference, on pages 55 and 56 he mentions:

“The principle of physical relativity”

What does it say:

"...when it is simply a question of verifying or describing the movement, it is theoretically indifferent to which reference body the movement refers to."

That is, we can take (k´) as the Moving Reference System (SRM) with respect to (K), or this (K) as the Moving Reference System with respect to (K´).

 

4.- CONSIDERATIONS ON THE PLATFORM AND THE CONTENT IN A REAL CASE.- A SCIENCE FICTION PLATFORM

Below we do an analysis of a PLATFORM that moves in outer space at an accelerated speed. We will consider as if it were a real case. Consequently, we do not consider the existence of “the rope” that A. Einstein tells us about in his “science fiction” mental experiment. In this real approach, we must take into account the following points:

1.- It is in the PLATFORMS where the type of speed is identified. In the case that we are studying, it is an accelerated speed.

  2.- What is inside the PLATFORMS moves at its speed. It is part of the whole. We cite as an example that everything on Earth moves with it.

3.- In the absence of acting forces, in outer space a Mass is either stationary or has a constant speed with respect to a Fixed Reference System (SRF), (Galileo's Principle)

Consequently:

4.- In a “real” case, NOT science fiction, we cannot imagine the so-called PLATFORM floating in outer space, acquiring speed increments by itself. What A. Einstein paints with his "rope" in the thought experiment is science fiction.

ON THE OTHER HAND

5.- We consider the mass as a CONTENT

6 .- In what refers to the CONTENT, as we will see below, what A. Einstein calls "Inertial Mass", is nothing more than a mass subjected to the action of the "Mechanical Impulse"

7.- If the generation of the inertial mass is caused by the PLATFORM, we cannot validate compliance with the laws of nature. This is the case of the invalidity of the First Principle (Example of the planet Earth)

8.- The CONTENT can indeed generate an inertial Mass.

Let's talk a little about the "entities" capable of moving on Earth. For example: living beings, a car...

We can consider a chain of relative movements. For example, a car is a CONTENT on Earth. But Due to its ability to move by a Mechanical Impulse we can consider it as a PLATFORM for its passengers, who are at the same time the Mass or CONTENT and this car in its braking can generate an Inertial Mass.

 

5- THE SO-CALLED INERTIAL MASS AS A RESULT OF THE ACTION OF THE MECHANICAL IMPULSE

We consider Forces as active agents that act on a passive agent that we call Mass.

We remember that according to Mechanical Physics, the expression of the "Mechanical Impulse" is: IM=F×t , where (F) is the force that acts on a mass and (t) the time in which this force acts.

We can apply this principle both to the mental experiment in which the train car is used, and the one in which the elevator is used.

First of all we will use the example of the train wagon.

The following drawing represents a train wagon, the PLATFORM, in which as CONTENT it carries a mass (m). The wagon is slowing down. Its decrease in speed is represented by: -∆(v)

        

This decrease in speed is caused by a FORCE (F) that is acting for a certain time (t) braking the wheels. That is, through the action of a MECHANICAL IMPULSE

The Mechanical Impulse is the CAUSE whose EFFECT is that the mass (m) moves from the rear of the wagon to the front of it. As we have already commented, the mass (m) behaves as a passive factor and the force as an active factor.

We could do the same approach in the event that the wagon accelerated its march. In this case, the mass (m) would move towards the rear wall of the wagon and we could continue considering that the so-called “inertial mass” is the behavior of the mass as a consequence of the Mechanical Impulse. It is not a question, as A. Einstein seems to misunderstand, “that has been transformed” into “inertial mass”. It is always the same entity.

As we explained at the beginning of this essay, the accelerated speeds are not valid for us to attribute them to relative movements: "The masses on Earth do not move on it"

 

6.- THE CONCEPT OF MASS IS UNIQUE. IS AN ENTITY

The author of the book that we are taking as a reference dedicates a lot of attention to establishing a distinction in the concept "Mass". He makes a first distinction by calling it Inertial Mass and Gravitational Mass, and this could be interpreted as two different entities. But, at the end of “dizzy the partridge”, he says:

"The same quality of the body manifests itself as inertia or as gravity" .

We say that it is a MANIFESTATION of the MASS when a Contact Force (Traction or Compression) or an Attraction Force acts on it. Perhaps it is a better way to interpret a "behavior" and not attribute it to a "transformation". Let us remember that in our last essay we already denounced that the author of the aforementioned book seems to have liked to think about "transmutations".

We believe that the best way to approach relative movements with accelerated speeds is using the ideas of: Platforms, Contents and Acting Forces.

In the aforementioned book, on page 60, he presents a "muddy" mathematical formula of doubtful validity. The validity of his approach seems designed so that his answer is in accordance with certain facts and not that, from certain facts, a mathematical formula is raised. The “certain facts are the existence of an Inertial Mass and a Gravitational Mass.

On page 65 of the aforementioned book, his author details a mental experiment in which he exposes the movement of a SAME MASS subjected respectively to a Traction Force and an Attraction Force. The mental experiment exposed by A. Einstein is quite "twisted". Perhaps, from what we will see, we could call him: "read it, understand it, and thus he will learn to walk through a maze"...

This experiment only demonstrates that, in the relative movements between bodies, their CONTENT, the Mass, can be moved using two different types of force. But, from here we cannot deduce anything else. It is only an exposition of a cause that produces its effect. Next, we have transcribed this thought experiment from the aforementioned book and, then, to make it more intelligible to the reader, at the end we have summarized its parts illustrating them with drawings. In this experiment the author, instead of using the elevator, uses the train car again. We transcribe the aforementioned experiment:

“… It is certainly true that the observer who is in the wagon feels a jerk forward as a consequence of the sudden braking and it is true that in this he notices the non-uniformity of the movement. But no one forces you to attribute the jerk to a "real" acceleration of the wagon. You could just as well interpret the episode like this: “My reference body (the wagon) remains constantly at rest. However, (during the braking time there is a temporally variable gravitational field directed forwards relative to it. Under the influence of the latter the embankment, together with the Earth, moves non-uniformly so that its initial velocity is directed backwards , decreases more and more. This gravitational field is also the one that produces the pull of the observer”

As we said, to try to improve the interpretation of this text, we have divided its content graphically and into two parts:

1.- Within a PLATFORM, which is considered a Mobile Reference System (SRM), as a consequence of a deceleration, an Inertial Force is generated over the mass (m) that is called Inertial Mass. This Inertial Mass is generated by braking the wagon.

The following figure represents three phases of advance of the train wagon in its deceleration: -∆(v) , and the movement by inertia of the mass (m).

In this first step, the author wants to highlight that the Mass has moved by inertia or that, from what we already know, in response to a Mechanical Impulse. Thus he intends to demonstrate that what he calls Inertial Mass exists and moves.

2.- In this second step he intends to demonstrate that “the same mass also moves in the presence of a gravitational field. Which he will call Gravitational Mass.

Change the PLATFORM (the wagon) as a Mobile Reference System (SRM) for that of a Fixed Reference System (SRF), and change the concept of moving the mass by inertia in front of the wagon, for the one that it is attracted by a field mobile gravity.

The following figure represents three phases of the movement of a mobile gravitational field that we have written in the previous transcript

 

It places this mobile gravitational field, which is moving in outer space, so we have to think, although it does not say so, that it presupposes some mobile "body" that intervenes and interacts with the mass (m) in this mobile gravitational field. .

This mobile gravitational field is attracting and displacing forward the mass (m), which is inside the immobile wagon. As cited in the experiment, this field increasingly moves further away from the train carriage. Consequently, it is getting weaker. In summary, with this mental experiment the aforementioned Physicist intends to demonstrate that the same mass can be

It moves due to inertia (according to us as a consequence of the mechanical impulse) and it also moves due to the effect of a gravitational field.

Apart from making a "science-fiction" approach, this approach does not allow us to accept: "that since the two actions cause an accelerated movement of the MASS, this is enough for us to accept that the" First Principle of Relativity is fulfilled. The accelerated movement of the Mass (m) precisely denies the fulfillment of such a Principle.

 

7.- THE FALLACY OF THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUIVALENCE

The author of the mentioned book in his mental experiment to validate the accelerated speeds in relative movements, makes the mistake of establishing an EQUIVALENCE between the result of submitting the MASS to the ACTION of an accelerated speed or submitting this same MASS to the attraction of a attractive force, such as gravity. He commits a fallacy of logical inconsistency. This is the fallacy called “false equivalence”. We transcribe the explanation that appears in an information medium that details seven of the possible existing fallacies:

“False equivalence is a fallacy of logic that describes a situation where there is an apparently logical equivalence, but in reality there is none. This fallacy can be classified as a fallacy of inconsistency.

It hurts that the aforementioned physicist, with the intelligence attributed to him, committed an outrage against logic.

(NOTE: Some time ago, in one of our books we also commented on one of these seven fallacies to which we have referred. It is the "ad hominen" fallacy. It is about admitting something as true by the mere fact that a person says it. person to whom we have some consideration.

The reader should not fall into the trap by believing the mental experiment that the aforementioned Physicist proposed to accept the Principle of Equivalence, for being who they say it was!)

In summary, the only EQUIVALENCE that we can establish between the two mentioned ACTIONS is that each of them results in MOVING the mass. But, we ask ourselves, is this EQUIVALENCE valid for us to be able to say that one ACTION can replace the response of the other?

Let's remember the example we gave in our first paragraph in the case of planet Earth. The acceleration of the PLATFORM, has as a response a sliding of its CONTENT; mass. The other ACTION, the force of gravity, does not displace the MASS on the PLATFORM, but attracts it towards its center. In the aforementioned ACTIONS, it is necessary to take into account their way of ACTING. That is, the two ACTIONS ARE NOT EQUIVALENT

 

8.- FACED WITH A SCIENCE FICTION PARADOX, A RATIONAL EXAMINATION

If in our previous essay we said that the “paradox of transmutation was very difficult to believe, in this essay, as we have seen, we have dealt with nonsense that is difficult to accept.

To digest and criticize the use of some mental experiments whose approach deviates from the minimum requirements of logic, we will comment below on a graphic simile that we have already exposed in previous essays. We call it the “Third Eye”.

Through a graphic simile, we present a metaphor that aims to represent our observation of a thought experiment in real life. We place ourselves outside the "observation yard" of the MENTAL experiment and, from the outside, we establish a PHYSICAL experiment to observe what would happen in a real case. This is what we could deduce from our essay.

The following figure is intended to represent this concept. The "yard" of this game is in outer space. Consider the Elevator as the Mobile Reference System (SRM) located in the "patio" and, also, in any situation of this "patio" the Fixed Reference System (SRF) that observes the experiment

If we agree with everything we have analyzed, to reveal another contradiction in this mental experiment we transcribe a piece of the story that appears in the book that we take as a reference and we will discover that its content belongs to the "patio"

We transcribe a part of the aforementioned mental experiment:

“…Is it lawful to laugh at man and say that his conception is a mistake? I think that if we want to be conscious, we cannot, but we must admit that his explanation does not attack reason or known mechanical laws. Even if the crate is accelerated with respect to the Galileo space considered first, it is possible to view it as stationary. So we have good reasons to extend the principle of relativity to reference bodies that are accelerated with respect to each other, and thus a powerful argument has been gained in favor of a postulate of general relativity."

We could put this piece of the thought experiment that we transcribe from the aforementioned book and that aims to validate relative movements with accelerated speeds in the mouth of the person who is outside the elevator and in the "thought experiment yard." We create and save our criteria from outside the “yard”. That is, from the "Third Eye"

Seen from the Third Eye, we say that this is the science fiction argument with which we baptize our essay. We can add that his reason leads us to consider that in the previous reasoning he commits another fallacy of logic. It is that, with a "FEELING" of the person-

The one that is inside the elevator tries to validate the EQUIVALENCE between the result of subjecting the MASS to the ACTION of an accelerated speed or subjecting this same MASS to the attraction of an attractive force.

 

9.- TRANSCRIPT OF THE ELEVATOR THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

From the book by A. Einstein, "On the theory of special and general relativity" (Ediciones ALTAYA S.A. February 1999) in paragraph 20, title: "Equality between inertial mass and gravitational mass as an argument of the postulate of GENERAL RELATIVITY", pages 61 and 62, we transcribe the following:

"Imagine a large piece of empty space, so far from stars and large masses that we can say with sufficient accuracy that we are dealing with the case provided for in Galileo's fundamental law. For this part of the universe it is then possible to choose a Galileo reference body for which the points at rest remain at rest and the moving points remain constantly in a uniform and rectilinear motion.As a reference body we imagine a large drawer in the shape of a room, and we assume that there is an observer equipped with devices for Naturally there is no gravity on him, he has to be roped to the floor, under penalty of being thrown to the ceiling at the slightest hit to the ground.

Suppose that in the center of the roof of the caisson, on the outside, there is a hook with a rope, and that a being, of which we are indifferent, begins to pull on it with a constant force. The crate, together with the observer, begins to fly "up" with a uniformly accelerated motion. Your speed will increase over time...always great heights to judge everyone from another reference body not pulling a string.

But how does the man in the drawer judge the process? The floor of the box transmits the acceleration pressure on the feet. Therefore, you must counteract this pressure with the help of your legs if you do not want to measure the ground with your body. So, you will be standing in the box like a person in any room of a house. If you drop a body that was previously in your hand, the crate's acceleration will stop acting on it, so it will approach the ground with an accelerated relative motion. The observer is also convinced that the acceleration of the body with respect to the ground is always the same great regardless of the body that performs the experiment.

On the basis of his knowledge of the gravitational field, as we have discussed in the last section, the man will come to the conclusion that he is, along with the box, within a fairly constant gravitational field. For a moment, however, you will be surprised that the caisson does not fall into this gravitational field, but then you discover the hook in the center of the ceiling and the tight rope attached to it, and you correctly infer that the caisson hangs at rest in that field.

Is it lawful to laugh at man and say that his conception is a mistake? I think that if we want to be conscious, we cannot, but we must admit that his explanation does not attack reason or known mechanical laws. Even if the crate is accelerated with respect to the Galileo space considered first, it is possible to view it as stationary. So we have good reasons to extend the principle of relativity to reference bodies that are accelerated relative to each other.