Where is that Single Experiment?

FOR POSTING ON HOME PAGE: Eight Three Refutations of Einsteinian GR

April 25, 2017

I would be most grateful if this table of eight three refutations of Einsteinian general relativity could be posted on the home pages of www.aias.us and www.upitec.org, with the following introduction.

” I used the well known quote from Albert Einstein: “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” In these eight three refutation papers and books, Albert Einstein is proven wrong in more ways than he could have imagined, having no computer algebra or data outside the solar system. He was proven wrong experimentally about fifty years ago, with the discovery of the velocity curve of the whirlpool galaxy. He is proven wrong again by S2 star systems. Elie Cartan wrote to him about the newly discovered spacetime torsion (early twenties), but it took until ECE theory in 2003 for the importance of torsion to be fully realized.””

Ron, Ron, Ron; we were expecting a handy cross-section of the hundreds of nonsense-papers which appear regularly in the ever-growing list of crackpot-journals and which claim refutation of EGR. Being anti-Einstein is, of course, a sine qua non for the career-pseudoscientist. All we got instead is drivel written by the embarrassing clown and shame-of-Wales, Myron Evans.  You really do not get how science functions, do you Ron? To be fair, that is a problem with many non-physicists. There are many paradoxes in physics, especially with regard to electromagnetism (e.g. the homopolar generator). Electrical engineers are particularly bad at resolving them. So bad, in fact, that such engineers readily deny the conservation laws and turn into perpetual-motion and antigravity enthusiasts (no names, no SS).  Physicists instead retain the conservation laws and thereby develop a deeper understanding of the phenomenon; even if that entails proposing some initially strange nay outrageous concepts (e.g. angular electromagnetic momentum of a simple RLC circuit). So, in the case of galaxy rotation, no physicist is going to throw out relativity; it works so well in other contexts that any true refutation would have to work in all of those contexts as well. Thus the flat part of the galaxy rotation graph is not a disproof of GR; it indicates only that gravity has to be tweaked, just as Newtonian dynamics had to be tweaked in order to explain well-known anomalies. Two popular tweaks are MOND and R^n (see previous posts). Another tweak is the positing of Dark Matter. This unfortunately seems to have become the most popular theory among the muggles; probably because it sounds like something out of Star Trek, and because journalists find it easier to explain that than to explain simple empirical mathematical laws.  We sincerely wish that more people knew about you, Ron, your name could then become a shorthand term for ‘a national disgrace in the field of science and the undeserving recipient of a Royal honour’. To be called an ‘Evans’ (a pejorative term already hinted-at in the Baez index) could then become as welcome as being called a ‘Quisling’.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: