It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Einstein's Theory of Relativity Proven Obsolete?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:05 AM
link   
I came across this and wanted those interested to view your opinions on it. This guy claims Einsteins Theory is Obsolete, and in a way i suppose it could be seen as such.

The Vortex Theory

Opinions are most Welcomed




[Edited on 4-6-2004 by Sapphire]




posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:21 AM
link   
WELL IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEONE HAD THE GUTS IN THE WORLD TO GET IT IN WRITING,NOONE HAS SINCE WILHELM REICH,BACK IN THE 50'S.THIS SCIENCE,OR ANTHROPOSOPHY,ORGONICS,WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT WAS DISCOVERED IN THE FIRST HALF O F THE LAST CENTURY.IF YOU HAVE READ REICH'S WORK,OR STEINER,OR RUTH DROWN,YOU WILL NOW.CHECK OUT TREVOR JAMES CONSTABLES WORK,FOR AN OVERVIEW.YES FOLKS,ITS TRUE ALRIGHT.IM STUDYING IT MYSELF,AS IT IS BLOCKED FROM BEING TAUGHT,THE BOOKS WERE SEIZED AND DESTROYED BACK IN THE 50'S.OK,THE ENERGY AT THE CENTRE OF THE VORTEX IS MASSLESS,THEREFORE CAN TRAVEL AT GREATER SPEEDS THAN LIGHT,,NO ENERGY REQUIRED.FOR EASY TESTS IN THIS FIELD LOOK UP CLOUDBUSTER AND ORGONE ACCUMULATOR.THIS IS WHAT ITS BEEN LEADING UP TO.THIS IS THE SCIENCE THEY DON'T WANT YOU LOOKING AT.ENJOY THE TRUTH.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:24 AM
link   
The statement that

"Einsteins theory of relativity is now obsolete" and
"Quantum mechanics is obsolete."

Is NOT valid at all!

This Vortex Theory is exactly what it claims to be - A THEORY!

It doesnt conclusively prove or disprove anything! (So far)

Interesting ideas though..



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:27 AM
link   
GREAT POSTING Sapphire!

Actually Prof. Huttons M-Thery with solving the puzzle of the Unified Field
and validating the String Thery was the breakthrough in the mid 1990.
Anyone intrested in QM should read the book the Elegant Universe what covers all info about the theory of reality. The Vortex Thery falls into this discovery.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:30 AM
link   
First of all, regardless whether or not this "vortex theory" actually has any substance, Einstein's theories are not "obsolete." Did the theory of relativity make Newton's laws of motion obsolete? No, because in many practical situations, they still adequately describe the laws of nature. Similarly, the theories of relativity cannot be made obsolete, as all experiments have shown them to be accurate.

Secondly, let's look at the facts concerning the dissemination of this theory:
- this theory has not been published in any reputable scientific journals
- the authors give no evidence supporting their claims (at least not on their website)
- if you want to read the theory in anything but Russian, you have to pay money

This is not standard practice in the scientific community (especially the money part), and taken as a whole I have to conclude that there is nothing groundbreaking here.

Many people have claimed that "Einstein was wrong!", yet under scrutiny every claim has been laid to rest. If RG Moon really has a "grand unification theory," I would expect him to submit his thesis for full peer review. Perhaps he is worried that he will be proven wrong if he does so?



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:31 AM
link   
The string theory is the theory about black holes isnt it?

THe one Stephen Hawkins lost a bet on?



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by harpalchemist
WELL IT'S ABOUT TIME SOMEONE HAD THE GUTS IN THE WORLD TO GET IT IN WRITING,NOONE HAS SINCE WILHELM REICH,BACK IN THE 50'S.THIS SCIENCE,OR ANTHROPOSOPHY,ORGONICS,WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT WAS DISCOVERED IN THE FIRST HALF O F THE LAST CENTURY.IF YOU HAVE READ REICH'S WORK,OR STEINER,OR RUTH DROWN,YOU WILL NOW.CHECK OUT TREVOR JAMES CONSTABLES WORK,FOR AN OVERVIEW.YES FOLKS,ITS TRUE ALRIGHT.IM STUDYING IT MYSELF,AS IT IS BLOCKED FROM BEING TAUGHT,THE BOOKS WERE SEIZED AND DESTROYED BACK IN THE 50'S.OK,THE ENERGY AT THE CENTRE OF THE VORTEX IS MASSLESS,THEREFORE CAN TRAVEL AT GREATER SPEEDS THAN LIGHT,,NO ENERGY REQUIRED.FOR EASY TESTS IN THIS FIELD LOOK UP CLOUDBUSTER AND ORGONE ACCUMULATOR.THIS IS WHAT ITS BEEN LEADING UP TO.THIS IS THE SCIENCE THEY DON'T WANT YOU LOOKING AT.ENJOY THE TRUTH.


Perhaps you'd like to provide a few good links to what you're talking about. I have heard and read a little on the things you've mentioned but would not say I'm much of an expert or even as well educated on the subjects as you seem to be. That being so, I don't know of any sites that I could recommend for others but maybe you know of a couple that are current and provide quality and credible information. I'm talking about the Cloudbusters and Orgone stuff also, not about debunking Einstien, btw.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:00 AM
link   
MOST OF THE MATERIAL I HAVE READ CONCERNING THIS FIELD ARE IN BOOKS,BUT SOME ARE AVAILABLE ON TH`E NET.PLANS FOR SIMPLE MACHINES ARE AT WWW.EDUCATE-YOURSELF.ORG(GO TO CHEMTRAILS AND THE PLANS ARE THERE,BUT REMEMBER THIS IS JUST THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.I THINK ITS UNDER THE HEADING,"GOODBYE CHEMTRAILS,HELLO BLUE SKIES!).I SUGGEST YOU TRY AND FIND BOOKS BY TREVOR JAMES CONSTABLE,RUDOLF STEINER,WACHSMUTH'S THE ETHERIC FORMATIVE FORCES IS IMORTANT,AND OF COURSE WILHELM REICH'S WORKS.I HAVE ALSO HEARD OF A MOTOR DESIGNED TO RUN ON ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE(ORGONE ENERGY)AND AM LOOKING INTO PLANS AT THE MOMENT.IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!DON'T LET ANYONE TELL YOU YOU ARE WRONG,UNTIL,AND I MEAN ONLY UNTIL,YOU HAVE DONE THE RESEARCH FOR YOURSELF.ONLY ACTIVITY WILL PROVE THE FACTS,AND ONCE YOU HAVE THE FACTS YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GO FORWARD,REMEMBER THIS IS GOING TO PUT A LOT OF NOSES OUT OF JOINT.THE FIRST GENERATION OF THINKERS THAT DISCOVERED THIS(BECAUSE OF RADAR,INCIDENTALLY)ENDED UP IN PRISON,OR WERE CONVENIENTLY TAKEN CARE OF,SO BE PREPARED FOR A BACKWASH FROM THE POWERS AT BE.THIS NEEDS MANY INDIVIDUALS WORKING INDEPENDENTLY,AND NEGATIVITY IS THE OPPONENTS WAY OF STOPPING YOU FROM EVEN TESTING IT OUT.HAVE FUN,AND I'LL SEE YOU ON THE OTHER SIDE.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:10 AM
link   
There's only one way to find out...Anyone prepared to actually buy the CD-ROMS??? Maybe you could help out the less fortunate...i.e. me..
I've been searching for more info about this particular theory, but I have found nothing even talking about it since 2003.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ezekiel
The string theory is the theory about black holes isnt it?

THe one Stephen Hawkins lost a bet on?


The Superstrings are in the nucleus of the atom and as seen the tiniest forces there are (In my opinium it would be the "omni particle" but scientists are have probally different names for it)
The String Theory / Later M-Theory is binding Newtons Law of Gravity + Einsteins "Speed of light" Theory with the Quantum World as Newton nor Einstein could unite their theorys and where outdated allready in the 1940s by Niels Bohr.

Stephen Hawking used the same methods to explain the Q-Wold as many Scientist worked on and is one facade what is making up a whole diamond of great thinkers -



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:47 AM
link   
I recall reading something about Einstein having come across some information he'd discovered which he claimed the World was "not ready for" at that time. Could it be that what he'd uncovered was in fact not what he'd discovered but something deeper, something that would have unravelled the seams of society at that point in history? There is a possibility "this" was it.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:50 AM
link   
www.lrz-muenchen.de...
homepage.ntlworld.com...
www.orgone.org...

link schmink; i pulled those up with the modern oracle of google; and any serious truth seeker can do the same just as easy, without relying on another for the help.


so about this vortex theory;

does it have any non physical variables?

to simplify my question, does it have any forces that are within its equation; that can not be measured by "scientific" means?



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:52 AM
link   
which theory of relativity ?? the general theory of relativity or the special theory of relativity, or both??



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 05:57 AM
link   
i dunno good question; and id take an off topic gander that all things are related in only one way: does the theory imply anything else?


W
W

but really that was a funny joke.

[Edited on 4-6-2004 by foolishbeing]



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 06:01 AM
link   
Tesla said he was wrong years ago.....

"He's a nice man, but he's wrong" ...Nikola Tesla

Tried to stop him, said it would lead to the destruction of the World.

Einstein's theory was always based on the "Fudge Factor" as Tesla called it...



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 09:07 AM
link   
General relativity has been right in all experiments to test it. It is internally consistent and gives testable predictions. It is a conceptually very easy, but mathematically quite difficult theory that can explain a lot of the properties of gravity. It can easily explain why all objects, no matter what material or mass, are attracted with the same strength. This is a direct result of the geodesic equation: the covariant derivative along vector u of the vector u is 0, where u is the four-velocity.

There is a field theory that is similar to general relativity, it's a tensor field theory. This theory can be adapted to fit the results of experiments (Feynmann, Weinberg, Deser) and becomes basicly the same theory as general relativity. (source: Gravitation by Misner, Thorpe & Wheeler, chapter 7).

This vortex theory should be able to predict all the outcomes of the experiments supporting general relativity correctly and should provide a testable prediction that is different from general relativity's prediction. A website without any math and without any evidence, will not convince.



posted on Jun, 4 2004 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I think the major assumption made in the Vector Theory was that time was not an actual property and just a "shadow" of movement. They also said entropy plays a part....
Mostly, they claim this theory solves all these different scientific mysteries, like the Michelson Morley experiment and the Newton-Relativity problem, they have a bunch listed under the nobel prie section.
But, I agree with amantine..it looks very sketchy..they have a proof in russian on the page though.
Does someone here speak russian...maybe they can translate the proof page?



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join