                       Ether andMagnetic field
 Galileo andEinsteinare wrong
 EquivalencePrinciple
 Ether andEquivalencePrinciple                  ON THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLEAccording to the General Theory of Relativity, attraction and inertia are two equivalent concepts of Physics. In addition, in the General Theory of Relativity, Einstein formulated the «equivalence principle» of attraction – inertia, which is as follows:THE «EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE» OF ATTRACTION – INERTIA: A homogenous field of inertial forces with acceleration γ is always equivalent to a homogenous field of gravitational forces, with intensity g, (γ = g).Therefore, according to the «equivalence principle» discussed above, a small chamber S (e.g. of dimensions 2x2x2 metres), moving away from a field of gravitational forces with acceleration, e.g. γ = 9,81 m/sec2, relative to an inertial reference system S’, fig. 1(a), then the homogenous field of inertial forces within the chamber S is equivalent to the homogenous field of gravitational forces within chamber S, when chamber S is immobile on the surface of the Earth (g = 9,81 m/sec2), fig. 1(b). Fig. 1Also, (according to the equivalence principle), when we say that the homogenous field of inertial forces with acceleration γ that exists within chamber S, fig. 1(a), is equivalent to the homogenous field of gravitational forces with intensity g, (γ = g), fig. 1(b), it means that: The same experiments,  conducted under the same conditions within chamber S would yield the same results in both the case of fig. 1(a) and fig. 1(b).  In other words, the experimental results are identical for the cases of fig.1(a) and fig. 1(b). Subsequently, an observer O, who is within chamber S, cannot distinguish, through any experiment of physics, whether the case of fig. 1(a) or fig. 1 (b) applies to his chamber S. Let’s assume now that we attach a spring (a dynamometer D), from the end of which is suspended a mass m,  to the ceiling of chamber S. In this case, we have the following:a. If observer O assumes that the case of fig. 1(a) applies, then the inertial mass mi (of the suspended mass m) can be calculated using the formula: where  F is the reading for force shown by the dynamometer, and γ is the acceleration with which chamber S is moving. b. If observer O assumes that the case of fig. 1(b) applies, then the gravitational mass mg (of the suspended mass m), can be calculated using the formula: where Β is the reading for weight shown on the dynamometer, and g is the intensity of the Earth’s field of gravitational forces on its surface.Subsequently (according to the «equivalence principle» mentioned above), since observer Ο, who is sealed within chamber S, cannot tell which of the two cases, fig. 1(a) or fig. 1(b), applies to his chamber S, the following relations will apply: Based on relations (3), relations (1) and (2) yield: From relations (4) and (5) results: Therefore (Einstein claims), according to the «equivalence principle» as described above, it is proven that a body’s inertial mass mi is always equal to its gravitational mass mg, i.e. mi = mg, relation (6). At this point, we need to clarify the following:As is widely know, the conclusion mi = mg of relation (6) is valid, as an axiom, which was formulated by Newton and has been verified by numerous experiments conducted between Newton’s time and today. On the contrary, however, in the General Theory of Relativity, the conclusion mi = mg of relation (6) is not an axiom but, as demonstrated above, results from the formulation of the «equivalence principle».Also, it must be stressed that:The fact that mi = mg is indeed valid (as an axiom of Classical Physics), does not, under any circumstances, mean that the «equivalence principle» is correct. Rather, Einstein symptomatically reached through the «equivalence principle» (as shown above) Newton’s already established conclusion mi = mg .The basic question that now emerges is this:QUESTION: Is the «equivalence principle» correct?The answer to that question is no. In fact, the «equivalence principle» is a completely false theory of physics, for the following reasons:Conclusions Ι and ΙΙ mentioned above are never valid. (See experiments 11, 12, 13, 14 at www.tsolkas.gr and especially the very simple experiment 14). The results of Galileo’s experiment (the Tower of Pisa experiment) are completely false. (See «Galileo and Einstein are wrong» at www.tsolkas.gr and especially the very simple experiment 13).Therefore, since the results of Galileo’s experiment are wrong, what Einstein claims, i.e. that:«A reference system S falling freely in the field of gravitational forces of a mass Μ, is locally equivalent to an inertial reference system» is wrong, and never valid in Nature. Specifically, the reference system S, which is in free fall, is certainly not locally equivalent to an inertial reference system (as Einstein claims) and is, in fact, never equivalent to an inertial reference system, even at a single point, e.g. the centre of reference system S (See «Galileo and Einstein are wrong» at www.tsolkas.gr). A body’s inertial mass mi and gravitational mass mg are always equal mi = mg (according to Newton’s well-known axiom) and those two masses mi and mg are never equivalent, as Einstein claims on the basis of the «equivalence principle».Newton was right,  for the simple reason that the «equivalence principle» is wrong, as proven above. The fact, however, that mi = mg , relation (6), is proven through the «equivalence principle» is purely coincidental, and the result of grave mistakes made by Einstein in his formulation of the «equivalence principle». EPILOGUEOn the basis of what we discussed above, it is proven, in a very simple way (and using Elementary Mathematics) that the «equivalence principle» of the General Theory of Relativity is not valid in Nature, and that, subsequently, the Theory of Relativity is a completely false theory of Physics. Finally, I have a question. Don’t all those «great» Physicists, who insist to this day that the Theory of Relativity is correct, see all the «clear and simple» facts mentioned above?This is truly one of the «paradoxes» of Science. I am certain that it will go down in the History of Physics, and the Physicists of the future will laugh... at the Physicists of today, who are too «blind» to see and to comprehend such simple things as those discussed above, in relation to the «equivalence principle»!!! ©  Copyright 2001 Tsolkas Christos.  Web design by Wirenet Communications