Change the Record!

Where Did Einsteinian General Relativity Go Wrong?

May 14, 2017

Einstein used the geometry known in his day, which was the second Bianchi identity of 1880 (Ricci) or 1902 (Bianchi). He based his field equation of 1915 directly on this identity, which does not contain spacetime torsion, discovered in the early twenties by Cartan and colleagues. As shown in UFT99, which is based directly on Carroll’s chapter three of “Spacetime and Geometry: blah … blah … blah … ad inf.

That’s an easy one:

It Didn’t … You Did!



6 Responses to “Change the Record!”

  1. Harry Hab Says:

    So – Private Dick’s latest slew of papers on viXra detail how he disagrees with Special Relativity 101. Ten years ago, he sacrificed his PhD prospects over whether or not an equation was a solution to Einstein’s field equations. Okay, all of this is equally mad, of course, but let us consider how the man himself might make sense of his stance. If PD rejects SR101 outright now, did he ever countenance GR? If he never did, what was the point of his argument then (from his point of view, mind)? And if he did at the time, but no longer does, should he now not feel that he ruined his career over nothing?

    • crackpotwatch Says:

      Well, who on Earth tries to start a career (via a PhD) in middle-age anyway? The Dismal Scientist (Bannister) is in the same boat; a PhD begun in middle-age. As real discoveries tend to be made by young PhDs, the above oldsters then seem to be driven to make ‘discoveries’ even if they are fake ones.

      • Harry Hab Says:

        Well, if he’d stuck to his initial brief and had been willing to accept that those around him might have known a thing or two that he didn’t, he could have become a half-decent scientific programmer.

        • crackpotwatch Says:

          We do not like amateur psychology but, in Crothers, we see a sickly person who took an interest in body-building. This suggests that he sees scientific authority (even unreal) as a way of bolstering something lacking in his psyche. The same reasoning also applies to Ron.

  2. Interested Observer Says:

    Crothers has done his critics a real favour with those SR papers, because they are so glaringly incompetent that it is obvious that he is not equipped to venture into GR. For a start, he seems to be under a fundamental (and very very basic) misconception about the geometry of Minkowski spacetime, one that any first-year undergraduate should be able to point out.

    Hilariously, he now writes that ‘spacetime is a fallacy’, which is a bit of a problem when set beside Ron’s claim that his work ‘completes the general relativity of Einstein by incorporating spacetime torsion’. WHOOPS!

    So the founder and life president of AIAS says that spacetime not only bends but twists, while his unpleasant Tasmanian lieutenant firmly states that the whole thing’s a fantasy. They have literally nothing in common. I feel that you should challenge Ron on this point, Crackpotwatch.

    • crackpotwatch Says:

      We have already drawn attention, indirectly, to the fact that Crothers is an electric-universe proponent. This would not be convenient to Ron, especially as Dunging-Davies (former AIAS member and rival for Steriwave employment) is also an electric-universe believer.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: