Relativity or Quantum Mechanics?

Well relativity has long since been proven irrelevant if you'll pardon my pun, so I'm gonna go with the former.

 

From an exterior source:

"Author: Greg Alexander
Date: 17 Sept 2003


These days it would appear that the Special Theory of Relativity was beyond any form of doubt however I have a theoretical proof that would strongly suggest that the theory is fundamentally flawed. Indeed the proof is so straight forward it is a wonder so many supposedly acute minds have previously overlooked it. The proof runs as follows :

If an observer with velocity v heads towards a beam of light one would have expected that the measurable velocity of the light beam would have been c + v. However according to the Special Theory of Relativity because time slows down and length decreases with velocity, the measured velocity of the beam would still be c. In other words a change in space and time for the observer slowed the new velocity of c + v back down to c again. However if the observer now heads in the opposite direction with the same velocity one would have expected that the measurable velocity of the beam without any relativistic effects, would now be c – v. But on this occasion a change in space and time for the observer would have to increase the measured velocity of light, the exact opposite of the case with c + v. But how could this be if time slows and length decreases with velocity, for the opposite to occur one would have expected that time would have needed to have speeded up and length increased? However both cannot be the case so therefore the speed of light could not remain constant when an observer's velocity changed with respect to either magnitude or direction.

Q.E.D.


The origin of this scientific red herring lies with the famous (though some may perhaps argue infamous) Michelson-Morley experiment. It was conducted by the two Americans whom it was named after in 1887 in order to prove or disprove the existence of ‘aether', the enigmatic substance thought to be contained in a vacuum upon which a light wave was able to move upon. The apparatus consisted of two beams of light meeting at right angles at an interferometer. If the Earth's speed effected either of the velocities of the light beams then the interference pattern obtained would change. However it was found that the speed of the Earth about the Sun did not appear to effect the interference pattern in any way and it was upon this observation that Einstein based his Special Theory of Relativity.

However just the briefest look at the exact set-up of the apparatus used by Michelson and Morley clearly reveals that the experiment could never have worked anyway. Indeed the logic supporting it is so flawed it is a wonder that no-one appears to have ever noticed. The two light beams which meet at the interferometer first travel away from it and at equal distances are reflected back again to the same half-silvered glass it started from. However because each light beam exactly doubles back on itself each time, it is obvious what the light beam would have gained as a result of the Earth's velocity in one direction, it would exactly lose on the way back again in the opposite direction, and vice versa. Indeed the experiment would never have proved or disproved the existence of the aether either.

Since the proof stated above clearly shows that the Special Theory of Relativity could never work, it must also be the case that a large part of the General Theory of Relativity is equally unsound since it is entirely based upon the Special Theory. As a consequence it would therefore appear that a significant part of twentieth century physics needs to be re-thought since the Theory of Relativity is intimately interwoven into it. Indeed Einstein's theory is so well established these days that it is even included in many of the physics text books."

I'd like to specify that this only applies to the theory of special relativity, not the theory of general relativity, which, as you've been so kind to inform us, is used in correcting for minuscule errors that amount to much larger deficits in GPS systems.

You'll pardon me for using the term "irrelevant"... I was merely enjoying some wordplay.

Consider yourself enlightened?

 

M-Theory.